Submitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2007-06-21 12:10
I have been watching with some amusement all of the SaveTheInternet-launched blogilantes ranting about the prospect of Internet backbone networks like AT&T or others, becoming a filtering technology solution to Hollywood's problem of rampant content piracy on the Internet.
Why am I amused?
Once again, the net neutrality crowd's kneejerk reaction is to side with lawbreakers rather than with every day citizens and users of the Internet who are all ultimately harmed by allowing Internet-enabled crimes to go undetected and unnpunished.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2007-06-21 10:51
I am blogging on this because the news follow-up does not appear to have connected the dots about how bizarre this combination sounds economically and competitively.
While on the surface it seems logical because Yahoo was reportedly in talks to buy MySpace before NewsCorp did.
What makes this bizarre is what has transpired since.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2007-06-20 11:24
Anyone concerned about their privacy should read the GREAT article in PC World on Google and privacy, and in particular should look at the call out box to see the risk about all that Google knows about you.
Let's see if the mainstream press picks up on this obvious and interesting populist story... it has legs.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2007-06-20 10:52
Anyone interested in privacy issues, should be on a heightened sense of alert, because Google has just won a big victory in getting its "pryware" deeper into the average American's private life.
The media focused only on the antitrust angle in covering Google's antitrust complaint against Microsoft, for not making it easy enough in its new Vista operating system for users to select Google as its search engine of computers' INTERNAL hard drive.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2007-06-18 15:08
"Paranoia" is either a mental disorder or a baseless suspicion.
Let's keep an eye on Google's spinmeisters to see if this was just one editor who chose the wrong word, or if it is part of Google's talking points to defend itself against privacy concerns.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2007-06-18 12:56
Can you believe it?
Google launches its new public policy blog today and the NetCompetition/Precursorblog is not one of the blog links under "What We Are Reading!" Horrors!
First of all, it is not very "authentic" of the Google bloggers to not admit that they regularly read Precursorblog -- we know they do!
Second, don't you believe for a minute that Google does not want to know what their latest public policy or PR vulnerability is.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2007-06-18 11:54
The following is the comment I posted to Google's first "authentic" blog post on net neutrality in Google's new public policy blog:
Welcome to the blogosphere! We congratulate Google for joining the NN debate more openly using your own "authentic" voice and not those of your surrogates. It is also about time for Google to be more specific on the issue of net neutrality.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2007-06-18 10:49
The New York Times reported a very telling statistic today on one of the prominent Webopolies in the Open Internet Coalition -- eBay.
95% market share! If that's not a Webopoly, what is?
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2007-06-15 09:43
You gotta love how the free market works when left alone by the Government!
Just as Frontline and others are demanding that the government has to intervene in the 700 MHz auction to "create" a third broadband pipe, the free market finds another way to solve these market problems without the Government.
One of the most significant developments in the spectrum world today was not the hot air at the Senate Commerce Committee hearing, but what happened in the free market -- DirecTV and Echostar signing agreements with Clearwire to sell their WiMax broadband service.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2007-06-14 11:11
The cover story in the Wall Street Journal today "A fight over what you can do with your cellphone; Handset makers push free features for which carriers pay for" was obviously perfectly-timed and placed by open access/net neutrality proponents trying to influence the Senate Commerce Committee hearing today on the FCC's 700 MHz auction.
What the article ignores is the broader and essential context of this issue and debate.