Internet in Danger

[Gypsy]

Defend our right to an Internet open and Universal

On May 6th, pressure from EU citizens has meant that the Directives that attempted to privatize Internet were not passed in the vote in the European Parliament.

This Autumn the Package will be negotiated again.

IN THE EUROPEAN ELECTIONS ON JUNE 6TH DO NOT VOTE FOR THE PARTIES WHICH WANT TO GIFT OUR RIGHT OF ACCESS TO THE INTERNET TO PRIVATE INTERESTS.

After checking the votes of the Members of the European Parliament in the vote of the so called “Telecoms Package” (explained below) is basic that we remember that the parties that voted against it, both Parties of Government and the Opposition equally, are willing to gift our right to a free and egalitarian communication through the Internet to private multinationals.

Citizens can remember and check it in this graphic where they can find the vote of all the  Members of the Parliament in the Telcoms’ Package vote (100% is the vote more favorable, 0% to private lobbies)

We suggest you send this simple questionnaire to the main candidates  in your country to know the their Parties’ position about Internet. and the future of the Telecoms Package.  Click here

Internet access is not conditional

Everyone who owns a website has an interest in defending the free use of Internet… so has everyone who uses Google or Skype… everyone who expresses their opinions freely, does research of any kind, whether for personal health problems or academic study … everyone who shops online…who dates online…socializes online… listens to music…watches video…


The internet as we know it is at risk. The new rules in the EU (the Telecoms package) voted on May 6 and will be negotiated again in Autumn propose that broadband providers will be legally able to limit the number of websites you can look at, and to tell you whether or not you are allowed to use particular services. It will be dressed up as ‘new consumer options’ which people can choose from. People will be offered TV-like packages – with a limited number of options for you to access. 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.

This is because Internet is now permitting exchanges between persons which cannot be controlled or “facilitated” by any middlemen (the State or a corporation). This possibility improves citizen’s life and makes access to knowledge easier to everyone, but force the industry (telecommunications, entertainment…) to lose power and control. Access providers have now learned that controlling access they can control the Information Society development. That is why they are pushing to act those changes.
The excuse is to promote competition, offering choices to users which better fit their behavior on the Internet and, by collaborating with sectors interested in the promotion of lawful content (aka the entertainment industry), to control the flow of music, films and entertainment content against the alleged piracy by downloading for free, using P2P file-sharing. However, the real victims of this plan will be all Internet users and the democratic and independent access to information, culture goods.

2- CONSEQUENCES FOR ALL OF US

Think about how you use the Internet! What would it mean to you if free access to the Internet was taken away?
These days, the Internet is about life and freedom. It’s about shopping, booking theatre tickets … holidays, learning, job-seeking, banking, and trade. It’s also about the fun things – dating, chatting, invitations, music, entertainment, joking and even a Second Life. It is a tool to express ourselves, to collaborate, innovate, share, stimulate new business ideas, reach new markets – thrive without middlemen..

Tim Berners-Lee, father of the World Wide Web  talks about the USA,….but in Europe the same is happening the same.

Just think – what’s your web address? (the one in your blog, your web…) If the Members of the European Parliament agree to the measures proposed in the Telecoms Package, 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. Yes, Amazon and a select few will be OK, they will be the included in the package. But your advertising on Google or any other website will be increasingly worthless. Skype could be blocked, (as it is already happening in Germany with the iPhone,). Small businesses could literally disappear, especially specialist, niche or artisan businesses.
If we don’t do something now – we could lose free and open use of the internet.

Our freedom (of choice in information, market, culture, pleasure) will be curtailed."

from: http://blackouteu.wordpress.com/

the Facebook group: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=73537262931

A video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jev2Um-4_TQ&feature=player_embedded

... In south America we got almost the same problem with our plan for a satellite and Telecoms programs.

seems take from a sci-fi script unbelievable 

[Ea, Lord of the Depths]

It's not gonna happen, but the very thought makes my testicles swell with rage.

[Jackie Manson]

I'm almost sure that its not gonna happen. Or at least i hope it doesnt.

[PussyCrust]

It's not gonna happen

You know, many people thought WWII wasn't going to happen, until they were dead. This could easily happen.

[Qucifer]

It's not gonna happen, but the very thought makes my testicles swell with rage.

You're going to need to fix that.

[Gypsy]

"

Internet service providers (ISPs) were handed the obligation to inform consumers of the consequences of illegal downloads as well as the illicit nature of certain activities such as piracy. During their vote in the Internal Market Committee of the European Parliament, on 7 July in Strasbourg, MEPs should distance themselves from the graduated response' model debated in France: anyone repeatedly found to be downloading films, music, etc, will have their internet connection cut from several weeks to a whole year after written warnings, then a registered letter sent asking them to stop.

After a long controversy sparked by the French bill, the rapporteurs of the telecoms package have reached a compromise: ISPs "will pass on information" to consumers. They will also have to increase customer awareness of network security as well as the protection of personal data and privacy.

Other amendments, however, go further still, though. MEPs believed that the telecoms package was not the place. "I have been accused of Sovietising the internet. It's outrageous. The goal of the text is not to enforce intellectual property law, but to inform the consumer, in the interest of his safety and protection," explained Malcolm Harbour (EPP-ED, UK), the rapporteur on the protection and consumer aspects of this legislation.(1)

PRE-CONTRACT INFORMATION

Its objective was to improve information for consumers before they sign a contract. Internet service providers will therefore have to tell consumers if they restrict access to certain services for commercial reasons. On mobile telephones with internet access, some operators have tried, for example, to restrict access to Skype (free online phone service) ..."

More about the articles here: http://www.accessmylibrary.com/article-1G1-181765184/telecoms-package-special-dossier.html

[Crowley: A blithe on your soul]

this is basically aimed at our side of the pond and Europe you yanks should be .. ok i think.

[Incariuz]

Nice articles Gypsy. However, this type of action has been debated for years, I actually got worried like 2 or 3 years ago about something like this, but as time passed, nothing came of it. The internet plays a massive role in human civilizations rights and freedoms in today's world, and if these rights and freedoms were stripped away, you could likely expect a full on riot. People can tolerate bandwidth limits, they can tolerate increase in monthly fees, but they will not tolerate being told, we're taking away a large portion of your existance, financial income, or ability to share pictures with your family that's half way across the world. Everything in this world revolves around money, and it's a joke to be honest, almost nobody values the simple things anymore, and in turn, it's constantly resulting in actions to ass rail one another, and will ultimately lead to further issues.

But what's it matter, their whole idea for doing this is to try and destroy piracy if you ask me, and in turn, they'll simply make it worse. Not being to access the internet fully will simply lead to more people being able to create versions of pirated material, and make money off them, by actually selling them on the streets, or w/e. So not only will it never stop piracy, but it'll likely help more people make a quick buck from piracy. That's my opinion on the matter atleast.

[PussyCrust]

Nice articles Gypsy. However, this type of action has been debated for years, I actually got worried like 2 or 3 years ago about something like this, but as time passed, nothing came of it. The internet plays a massive role in human civilizations rights and freedoms in today's world, and if these rights and freedoms were stripped away, you could likely expect a full on riot. People can tolerate bandwidth limits, they can tolerate increase in monthly fees, but they will not tolerate being told, we're taking away a large portion of your existance, financial income, or ability to share pictures with your family that's half way across the world.

Kent State happened, why couldn't this? You think anyone in power cares about a civilian uprising? Everyone who opposes the idea could be prosecuted or killed, and what are we gonna do about it? Nothing.

[Crowley: A blithe on your soul]

Nice articles Gypsy. However, this type of action has been debated for years, I actually got worried like 2 or 3 years ago about something like this, but as time passed, nothing came of it. The internet plays a massive role in human civilizations rights and freedoms in today's world, and if these rights and freedoms were stripped away, you could likely expect a full on riot. People can tolerate bandwidth limits, they can tolerate increase in monthly fees, but they will not tolerate being told, we're taking away a large portion of your existance, financial income, or ability to share pictures with your family that's half way across the world.

Kent State happened, why couldn't this? You think anyone in power cares about a civilian uprising? Everyone who opposes the idea could be prosecuted or killed, and what are we gonna do about it? Nothing.

Basically the pirates rule if they privitise the internet , some will find a way to make it free again.

[PussyCrust]

People are too used to the freedoms they have been given. They don't think it can be taken away as quickly as it has been given. Shocking, to say the least.

[Incariuz]

I'm sure people realize how easy it can be taken away, but that's beyond the fact. If world governments actually thought the consequences through better, they'd see the actions being taken to prevent piracy may in turn cause economical issues. They want to help those who are already making 5+ million from a music album make 7+, well... Even if you beat the piracy market, you're also destroying a method of income for thousands and thousands of people. The internet is a multi billion dollar industry in terms of businesses, and once these are out of reach, what do these people do for an income? flip burgers? We already have a severe shortage of employement options around the globe, this will just make it worse. So now considering the large loss caused by doing so... You've just reduced the number of people who will have that load of cashflow to buy that musicians cd, and the act meant to help him jump from 5+ to 7+ mil per album may have just altered it so it jumps from 5+ to 3+ instead.

Every action has a series of possible consequences, the end result cannot be foreseen, so it boils down to the question.

Is it really worth the risk of producing an even worse economy?

[Gypsy]

Nice articles Gypsy. However, this type of action has been debated for years, I actually got worried like 2 or 3 years ago about something like this, but as time passed, nothing came of it. The internet plays a massive role in human civilizations rights and freedoms in today's world, and if these rights and freedoms were stripped away, you could likely expect a full on riot. People can tolerate bandwidth limits, they can tolerate increase in monthly fees, but they will not tolerate being told, we're taking away a large portion of your existance, financial income, or ability to share pictures with your family that's half way across the world. Everything in this world revolves around money, and it's a joke to be honest, almost nobody values the simple things anymore, and in turn, it's constantly resulting in actions to ass rail one another, and will ultimately lead to further issues.

But what's it matter, their whole idea for doing this is to try and destroy piracy if you ask me, and in turn, they'll simply make it worse. Not being to access the internet fully will simply lead to more people being able to create versions of pirated material, and make money off them, by actually selling them on the streets, or w/e. So not only will it never stop piracy, but it'll likely help more people make a quick buck from piracy. That's my opinion on the matter atleast.

that´s what their proclaim. But what is behind?
... the new articles talk about "packages" like cable tv. So you will pay for strict number of pages that you are able to see

Internet proofs that the monopoly, and consumerism falls under anarchy. The truth, real and natural way of beings. We are anarchist by nature, we do not need money to do art, we do not need money to share and expand our universes

[PussyCrust]

I'm sure people realize how easy it can be taken away, but that's beyond the fact. If world governments actually thought the consequences through better, they'd see the actions being taken to prevent piracy may in turn cause economical issues. They want to help those who are already making 5+ million from a music album make 7+, well... Even if you beat the piracy market, you're also destroying a method of income for thousands and thousands of people. The internet is a multi billion dollar industry in terms of businesses, and once these are out of reach, what do these people do for an income? flip burgers? We already have a severe shortage of employement options around the globe, this will just make it worse. So now considering the large loss caused by doing so... You've just reduced the number of people who will have that load of cashflow to buy that musicians cd, and the act meant to help him jump from 5+ to 7+ mil per album may have just altered it so it jumps from 5+ to 3+ instead.

Every action has a series of possible consequences, the end result cannot be foreseen, so it boils down to the question.

Is it really worth the risk of producing an even worse economy?

Money is as important as cancer.

[MysticSoul]

I'm sure people realize how easy it can be taken away, but that's beyond the fact. If world governments actually thought the consequences through better, they'd see the actions being taken to prevent piracy may in turn cause economical issues. They want to help those who are already making 5+ million from a music album make 7+, well... Even if you beat the piracy market, you're also destroying a method of income for thousands and thousands of people. The internet is a multi billion dollar industry in terms of businesses, and once these are out of reach, what do these people do for an income? flip burgers? We already have a severe shortage of employement options around the globe, this will just make it worse. So now considering the large loss caused by doing so... You've just reduced the number of people who will have that load of cashflow to buy that musicians cd, and the act meant to help him jump from 5+ to 7+ mil per album may have just altered it so it jumps from 5+ to 3+ instead.

Every action has a series of possible consequences, the end result cannot be foreseen, so it boils down to the question.

Is it really worth the risk of producing an even worse economy?

Money is as important as cancer.