NY Times: "Google and Verizon in Talks on Web Priority"
Questa mi sembra una notizia, se confermata, di quelle importanti. jc August 4, 2010 Google and Verizon in Talks on Web Priority By EDWARD WYATT <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/w/edward_wyatt/in...> WASHINGTON --- Google <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/google_inc/index.html?...> and Verizon <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/verizon_communications...>, two leading players in Internet service and content, are nearing an agreement that could allow Verizon to speed some online content to Internet users more quickly if the content's creators are willing to pay for the privilege. The charges could be paid by companies, like YouTube <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/youtube/index.html?inl...>, owned by Google, for example, to Verizon, one of the nation's leading Internet service providers, to ensure that its content received priority as it made its way to consumers. The agreement could eventually lead to higher charges for Internet users. Such an agreement could overthrow a once-sacred tenet of Internet policy known as net neutrality <http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/subjects/n/net_neutra...>, in which no form of content is favored over another. In its place, consumers could soon see a new, tiered system, which, like cable television, imposes higher costs for premium levels of service. Any agreement between Verizon and Google could also upend the efforts of the Federal Communications Commission <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/f/federal_...> to assert its authority over broadband service, which was severely restricted by a federal appeals court decision in April. People close to the negotiations who were not authorized to speak publicly about them said an agreement could be reached as soon as next week. If completed, Google, whose Android operating system powers many Verizon wireless phones, would agree not to challenge Verizon's ability to manage its broadband Internet network as it pleased. [...] Continua qui: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/05/technology/05secret.html
Ciao a Tutti, In questo post potete trovare maggiori informazioni: http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2009/10/finding-common-ground-on-open... Questa è anche la dichiarazione di Eric Schmidt sull'argomento: "The New York Times is quite simply wrong. We have not had any conversations with Verizon about paying for carriage of Google traffic. We remain as committed as we always have been to an open Internet." A presto. marco On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:12 AM, J.C. DE MARTIN <demartin@polito.it> wrote:
Questa mi sembra una notizia, se confermata, di quelle importanti.
jc
August 4, 2010 Google and Verizon in Talks on Web Priority By EDWARD WYATT<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/w/edward_wyatt/in...>
WASHINGTON — Google<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/google_inc/index.html?inline=nyt-org>and Verizon<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/verizon_communications...>, two leading players in Internet service and content, are nearing an agreement that could allow Verizon to speed some online content to Internet users more quickly if the content’s creators are willing to pay for the privilege.
The charges could be paid by companies, like YouTube<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/youtube/index.html?inl...>, owned by Google, for example, to Verizon, one of the nation’s leading Internet service providers, to ensure that its content received priority as it made its way to consumers. The agreement could eventually lead to higher charges for Internet users.
Such an agreement could overthrow a once-sacred tenet of Internet policy known as net neutrality<http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/subjects/n/net_neutra...>, in which no form of content is favored over another. In its place, consumers could soon see a new, tiered system, which, like cable television, imposes higher costs for premium levels of service.
Any agreement between Verizon and Google could also upend the efforts of the Federal Communications Commission<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/f/federal_communications_commission/index.html?inline=nyt-org>to assert its authority over broadband service, which was severely restricted by a federal appeals court decision in April.
People close to the negotiations who were not authorized to speak publicly about them said an agreement could be reached as soon as next week. If completed, Google, whose Android operating system powers many Verizon wireless phones, would agree not to challenge Verizon’s ability to manage its broadband Internet network as it pleased. [...]
Continua qui: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/05/technology/05secret.html
_______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa@server-nexa.polito.it https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
-- Marco Pancini European Senior Policy Counsel Google Italy Corso Europa, 2 20122 Milano, Italia Tel. +39 02 36618524 Cell. +39.348.9946222 pancini@google.com Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/googlepolicyit This email may be confidential or privileged. If you received this communication by mistake, please don't forward it to anyone else, please erase all copies and attachments, and please let me know that it went to the wrong person. Thanks.
Grazie, Marco, per la segnalazione e la precisazione. Posso pero' commentare che l'intervento di Eric Schmidt non mi sembra sufficientemente netto? In altri termini, lo trovo un po' troppo "politico" per tranquilizzarmi del tutto, come anche notato in alcuni dei commenti (per esempio, quello di "Concerned Netizen"). Tu come la vedi? juan carlos Marco Pancini wrote (on 05/08/2010 16.18):
Ciao a Tutti, In questo post potete trovare maggiori informazioni: http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2009/10/finding-common-ground-on-open...
Questa è anche la dichiarazione di Eric Schmidt sull'argomento: "The New York Times is quite simply wrong. We have not had any conversations with Verizon about paying for carriage of Google traffic. We remain as committed as we always have been to an open Internet."
A presto. marco
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:12 AM, J.C. DE MARTIN <demartin@polito.it <mailto:demartin@polito.it>> wrote:
Questa mi sembra una notizia, se confermata, di quelle importanti.
jc
August 4, 2010
Google and Verizon in Talks on Web Priority
By EDWARD WYATT <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/w/edward_wyatt/in...>
WASHINGTON — Google <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/google_inc/index.html?...> and Verizon <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/verizon_communications...>, two leading players in Internet service and content, are nearing an agreement that could allow Verizon to speed some online content to Internet users more quickly if the content’s creators are willing to pay for the privilege.
The charges could be paid by companies, like YouTube <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/youtube/index.html?inl...>, owned by Google, for example, to Verizon, one of the nation’s leading Internet service providers, to ensure that its content received priority as it made its way to consumers. The agreement could eventually lead to higher charges for Internet users.
Such an agreement could overthrow a once-sacred tenet of Internet policy known as net neutrality <http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/subjects/n/net_neutra...>, in which no form of content is favored over another. In its place, consumers could soon see a new, tiered system, which, like cable television, imposes higher costs for premium levels of service.
Any agreement between Verizon and Google could also upend the efforts of the Federal Communications Commission <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/f/federal_...> to assert its authority over broadband service, which was severely restricted by a federal appeals court decision in April.
People close to the negotiations who were not authorized to speak publicly about them said an agreement could be reached as soon as next week. If completed, Google, whose Android operating system powers many Verizon wireless phones, would agree not to challenge Verizon’s ability to manage its broadband Internet network as it pleased.
[...]
Continua qui: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/05/technology/05secret.html
_______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa@server-nexa.polito.it <mailto:nexa@server-nexa.polito.it> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
-- Marco Pancini European Senior Policy Counsel Google Italy Corso Europa, 2 20122 Milano, Italia Tel. +39 02 36618524 Cell. +39.348.9946222 pancini@google.com <mailto:pancini@google.com> Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/googlepolicyit
This email may be confidential or privileged. If you received this communication by mistake, please don't forward it to anyone else, please erase all copies and attachments, and please let me know that it went to the wrong person. Thanks.
Policy by leaks? On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:12 AM, J.C. DE MARTIN <demartin@polito.it> wrote:
Questa mi sembra una notizia, se confermata, di quelle importanti.
jc
August 4, 2010
Google and Verizon in Talks on Web Priority
By EDWARD WYATT
WASHINGTON — Google and Verizon, two leading players in Internet service and content, are nearing an agreement that could allow Verizon to speed some online content to Internet users more quickly if the content’s creators are willing to pay for the privilege.
The charges could be paid by companies, like YouTube, owned by Google, for example, to Verizon, one of the nation’s leading Internet service providers, to ensure that its content received priority as it made its way to consumers. The agreement could eventually lead to higher charges for Internet users.
Such an agreement could overthrow a once-sacred tenet of Internet policy known as net neutrality, in which no form of content is favored over another. In its place, consumers could soon see a new, tiered system, which, like cable television, imposes higher costs for premium levels of service.
Any agreement between Verizon and Google could also upend the efforts of the Federal Communications Commission to assert its authority over broadband service, which was severely restricted by a federal appeals court decision in April.
People close to the negotiations who were not authorized to speak publicly about them said an agreement could be reached as soon as next week. If completed, Google, whose Android operating system powers many Verizon wireless phones, would agree not to challenge Verizon’s ability to manage its broadband Internet network as it pleased.
[...]
Continua qui: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/05/technology/05secret.html
_______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa@server-nexa.polito.it https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
"could could could" could anche be che mettono dei file sulla Content delivery network di verizon, per "speed up" la delivery dei contnuti. Btw, apple lo fa da sempre ed e' la ragione di esistenza di akamai e colleghi... Questa storia degli accordi preferenziali di google e' un po' come il D'alia, periodicamente riemerge... La differenziazione di performance sull'accesso si fa da sempre. .NET vendeva una SLIP/PPP a 2,4MLit contro le 240KL di TI o il gratis di VOL. noi avevamo un overbooking 1:5, TI lo aveva 1:30, VoL >1:100.. (da noi c'era anche il tecnico di supporto di riferimento che rispondeva in 3 squilli). Quando siemo entrati nel residenziale abbiamo differenziato qualita' di servizio con una offerta massimo 1:30 e call center ben dimensionato. Il brand era diverso, pur dicendo che era di I.NET e l'infrastruttura era la stessa. tutti i principali content provider italiani vrnivano da I.NET in housing perche' avevamo le performance migliori e due clienti che avevano l'housing a 256Kbps su porta dedicata (c'era anche un livello di servizio non garantito su lan condivisa) andavano entrambi esattamente uguale ed esattamente la meta' di chi aveva un 512k. IMHO la violazione della Net Neutrality si ha quando, tra due utenti che hanno lo stesso abbonamento, uno ha prestazioni maggiori dell'altro accedendo a dei server con la stessa connessione, e cio' accade vuoi peril contenuto dei pacchetti, vuoi per diverso accordi contrattuali, vuoi per privilegiare un servzizio dell'operatore stesso, vuoi per favorire un terzo rispetto ad altro terzo. E questo ha a che fare con l'antitrust poi c'e il tema dell'intercettazone dei pacchetti a fini diversi, non richiesti dall'utente (tipo profiling del traffico) e questo ha a che fare con la privacy. In sintesi... penso sia meglio aspettare che ci siano meno could, perche maybe (likely) could be una bolla di sapone... Ciao, s. ___ www.reeplay.it www.eximia.it ..... Original Message ....... On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 16:58:40 +0200 "Andrea Glorioso" <andrea@digitalpolicy.it> wrote:
Policy by leaks?
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:12 AM, J.C. DE MARTIN <demartin@polito.it> wrote:
Questa mi sembra una notizia, se confermata, di quelle importanti.
jc
August 4, 2010
Google and Verizon in Talks on Web Priority
By EDWARD WYATT
WASHINGTON — Google and Verizon, two leading players in Internet service and content, are nearing an agreement that could allow Verizon to speed some online content to Internet users more quickly if the content’s creators are willing to pay for the privilege.
The charges could be paid by companies, like YouTube, owned by Google, for example, to Verizon, one of the nation’s leading Internet service providers, to ensure that its content received priority as it made its way to consumers. The agreement could eventually lead to higher charges for Internet users.
Such an agreement could overthrow a once-sacred tenet of Internet policy known as net neutrality, in which no form of content is favored over another. In its place, consumers could soon see a new, tiered system, which, like cable television, imposes higher costs for premium levels of service.
Any agreement between Verizon and Google could also upend the efforts of the Federal Communications Commission to assert its authority over broadband service, which was severely restricted by a federal appeals court decision in April.
People close to the negotiations who were not authorized to speak publicly about them said an agreement could be reached as soon as next week. If completed, Google, whose Android operating system powers many Verizon wireless phones, would agree not to challenge Verizon’s ability to manage its broadband Internet network as it pleased.
[...]
Continua qui: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/05/technology/05secret.html
_______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa@server-nexa.polito.it https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
_______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa@server-nexa.polito.it https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
Segnalo che sulla G.U.U.E. 27.7.2010, n. L 195/5 è stato pubblicato l'Accordo tra l'Unione europea e gli Stati Uniti d'America sul trattamento e il trasferimento di dati di messaggistica finanziaria dall'Unione europea agli Stati Uniti ai fini del programma di controllo delle transazioni finanziarie dei terroristi http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOIndex.do?year=2010&serie=L&textfield2=195&Submit=... Segnalo, inoltre, un interessante intervento a firma Leda Bargiotti su "Unione Europea e segreto di stato: un quadro normativo ancora in piena evoluzione" postato su un blog che vuole contribuire a rendere più trasparenti le istituzioni http://slsg.wordpress.com/2010/07/30/unione-europea-e-segreto-di-stato-un-qu... ms
Grazie margherita per entrambe le notizie; hai idea di perché la tua e-mail risulti spedita il 9 agosto ma arrivata solo oggi? M. Da: nexa-bounces@server-nexa.polito.it [mailto:nexa-bounces@server-nexa.polito.it] Per conto di Margherita Salvadori Inviato: lunedì 9 agosto 2010 14.12 A: nexa@server-nexa.polito.it Oggetto: [nexa] Spazio di libertà sicurezza e giustizia Segnalo che sulla G.U.U.E. 27.7.2010, n. L 195/5 è stato pubblicato l'Accordo tra lUnione europea e gli Stati Uniti dAmerica sul trattamento e il trasferimento di dati di messaggistica finanziaria dallUnione europea agli Stati Uniti ai fini del programma di controllo delle transazioni finanziarie dei terroristi <http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOIndex.do?year=2010&serie=L&textfield2=195&Submit =Cercare&_submit=Cercare&ihmlang=it> http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOIndex.do?year=2010&serie=L&textfield2=195&Submit= Cercare&_submit=Cercare&ihmlang=it Segnalo, inoltre, un interessante intervento a firma Leda Bargiotti su "Unione Europea e segreto di stato: un quadro normativo ancora in piena evoluzione" postato su un blog che vuole contribuire a rendere più trasparenti le istituzioni <http://slsg.wordpress.com/2010/07/30/unione-europea-e-segreto-di-stato-un-q uadro-normativo-ancora-in-piena-evoluzione/> http://slsg.wordpress.com/2010/07/30/unione-europea-e-segreto-di-stato-un-qu adro-normativo-ancora-in-piena-evoluzione/ ms
participants (6)
-
Andrea Glorioso -
J.C. DE MARTIN -
Marco Pancini -
Marco Ricolfi -
Margherita Salvadori -
Stefano Quintarelli