EU Vote on "Telecoms Package" - Internet Restriction

[Mr Flibble]

Well not necessarily the END of the Internet, but certainly the end of nice open Internet.

As I understand it the proposal will force ISPs to limit the services you can access unless you buy additional packages- kind of like how you can buy packages of channels on digital TV.

Your usage of the Internet will be severely restricted and not all of the services and sites you enjoy the use of currently will be available to you in the future. To quote the second website;

"It means that the Internet will be packaged up and your ability to access and to put up content could be severely restricted. It will create boxes of Internet accessibility, which don't fit with the way we use it today.

Just think - what's your web address? Unless people have that address in their "package" of regular websites - they won't be able to find you. That means they can't buy, or book, or register, or even view you online. Your business won't be able to find niche suppliers of goods - and compare prices. If you get any money at all from advertising on your site, it will diminish." (My bold text, not emphasised in original text)

IF this draft resolution is accepted.

If a vote is passed successfully on this thing, we'll never see the end of it, which is why action is important.

You can find out more here, and on the more detailed pages it links to.

And this site will provide some more information, particularly on how to contact your MEP and a template email you can send if you feel like it.

(I know emailing your MEP sounds like a lot of hassle but there is a fairly convenient form for it)

I also know this isn't the place for political punditry, but I know a lot of AGSers have websites and that this may be of concern to them. Even those without websites may find it concerning. The usual caveat applies here, that passing legislation will not necessarily lead to 1984 overnight etc. and there have been other legislations (eg. Net Neutrality in the US) which have been brewing for years without any kind of actual... impact.

[GarageGothic]

I haven't researched more than the two links you posted, but this sounds like scaremongering to me. As far as I can tell they are pulling this idea of TV-like packages out of their asses. So what if "broadband providers will be legally able to limit the number of websites you can look at" (not "forced" as you write)? How many are actually going to do it? If just one ISP decides not to block anything, they'll soon be the one with all the customers. There's really no money to be made in this business model. To an ISP traffic is traffic, and they're even reluctant to block peer-to-peer networks short of a court order, because their business is selling high-speed connections to those who need them with no questions asked. I doubt even the entertainment industry could afford enough money in bribes to match the income from millions of users paying a monthly fee.

Edit: I thought I had read a similar discussion before. I could swear I also made a post, but apparently not - at least this reply pretty much sums up my thoughts on both matters. And if it turns out I'm wrong, well, then none of you will be able to access the forums to tell me so anyway

[Mr Flibble]

I'm finding it very hard to locate any articles on this which *aren't* just blatant scaremongering. I'm looking for one which details the specific legal changes that will be made and I can't find one.

So far the best I can find is this;
"...will permit the monitoring and blocking of websites and peer-to-peer exchanges by ISPs,"
Taken from the abstract of the paper.

This is certainly a lot less worrying than the things people have extrapolated from it. (I knew I was wading in murky waters when I found a "Spread the word" article ended with "Please cite me as the author"...)

But that's good, it's going to be something the ISPs will be told to do, not forced. I don't really know enough about net neutrality at this point but I was under the impression that ISPS were being pressured towards this kind of action by various Government groups and media lobbies... I remember one case in particular where a media company (I'm thinking it was either Time Warner or the RIAA?) were blaming the ISPs for piracy because they weren't throttling P2P traffic.

[Pumaman]

We have seen this discussion before, but in this thread:
http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/yabb/index.php?topic=34315.0

Nothing's going to force ISP's to do anything (other than collect and store a list of every website and e-mail address that you've used under the guise of "anti-terrorism"), and in fact they could already charge you for internet use this way if they wanted.