Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 22nd Jun 2011 14:42 UTC
Internet & Networking After an epic vote fail in the lower house yesterday (labour accidentally voted against net neutrality lolfail), which was rectified today, The Netherlands has officially become the second country in the world, and the first in Europe, to turn net neutrality into law (okay, technically it needs to pass the senate, but that's more of a formality in our system). A big middle finger to Sarkozy, Cameron, and Obama. Hey Chile, ./fistbump.sh. We're honoured to follow in your footsteps!
Thread beginning with comment 478292
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Alfman
Member since:
2011-01-28

Berend de Boer,

"I just saw a government outlawing businesses. Dozens of people will come home from work today and tell their families they don't have a job anymore."

Well, if the companies' business models are oppressive or discriminatory, then I have no problem telling them to either close up shop or find a business model which actually serves customers instead of controlling us.

I don't want my ISP dictating what services I use. Whole swaths of the WWW could be relegated to premium subscriptions because those site owners don't have contracts in place with the ISPs. This is pretty much what it will come to if we allow ISPs to discriminate traffic.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

I pay for the bits I use, it shouldn't matter where they come from or where they are going.

Unless ofcourse I'm trying to distribute spam/malware and so on.

And that is exactly what deap packet inspection was meant to be able to look for.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Berend de Boer Member since:
2005-10-19

And that is exactly what deap packet inspection was meant to be able to look for.


Interesting. It might actually be that malware inspection or virus checking is now illegal too. Wouldn't surprise me.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

And that is exactly what deap packet inspection was meant to be able to look for.


Meh, "deep packet inspection" is mostly snakeoil, especially for encrypted traffic. I'm sure there are companies who wants to sell you their awesome DPI products though.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Berend de Boer Member since:
2005-10-19

Well, if the companies' business models are oppressive or discriminatory, then I have no problem telling them to either close up shop or find a business model which actually serves customers instead of controlling us.


These are companies providing filtering services for their customers (i.e. porn filters), so customers get so called "safe" internet.

That just became illegal.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

Berend de Boer,

"These are companies providing filtering services for their customers (i.e. porn filters), so customers get so called 'safe' internet. That just became illegal."

I doubt the validity of this statement. If you can cite the relevant piece of legislation then we can debate it.

In principal, I see no reason an ISP couldn't offer add-on services to customers, but these services should be completely elective (as in explicit opt-in) and should not preclude customers from signing up to competing services.

If the ISP wants to offer these services in such a way that discriminates against competing services, then that should be illegal.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

These are companies providing filtering services for their customers (i.e. porn filters), so customers get so called "safe" internet.

That just became illegal.

Nope.

People can buy filtering services if they want.

ISPs just can't force them on their customers.

There's a world of difference. Would you really like a world where someone could modify your brain so that you can't see some people, forever, not even know that they exist ? Every blocking service should be separate from the core access to information.

Edited 2011-06-23 06:18 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4