AT&T and Google step up net neutrality lobbying
-
Author: Monica Horten
-
Published: 12 February 2009
An event on 26th February positions AT&T and Google lobbyists taking the lead in a Brussels seminar on net neutrality.
The event is timed to coincide with the Second Reading of the Telecoms Package, where amendments promoted by AT&T, opposed to net neutrality, are under consideration in the Universal Services directive (Harbour report). Google is also reported to be touting amendments around the European Parliament. The Google amendments are understood to be purveyed under the title of 'net neutrality' but they may or may not be good for citizens' interests.
The event is organised by the European Newspaper Publishers Association (ENPA) and the European Federation of Magazine Publishers (FAEP), two voices so far unheard in the whole Telecoms Package debate . The two groups represent national, regional and local newspaper and magazine publishers around Europe. It is curious why they want to get involved now.
ENPA opposed the copyright amendments in the Telecoms Package. On its website, it says: "we would resist
and reject any attempt to regulate content by national or pan-European regulatory authorities, and by certain parts of the package relating to copyright - our fear being that certain measures intended to protect copyright could unintentionally conflict with the universal rights of freedom of expression and access to information. "
Please attribute: Monica Horten, AT&T and Google step up net neutrality lobbying, http://www.iptegrity.com. 12 February 2009.
-
Article Views: 10879
IPtegrity politics
- Social media ban for kids: simple message, tough choices
- How could they ban X?
- Grok AI images: can compliance be enforced?
- AI and copyright – an author’s viewpoint
- UK climb-down over Apple back-door was foreseeable
- Copyright wars 3.0: the AI challenge
- Why would the UK take on Apple?
- What's influencing tech policy in 2025?
- Online Safety and the Westminster honey trap
- Shadow bans: EU and UK diverge on user redress
- EU at loggerheads over chat control
- Why the Online Safety Act is not fit for purpose
- Fixing the human rights failings in the Online Safety Act
- Whatever happened to the AI Bill?
- Hidden effects of the UK Online Safety Act
- EU puts chat control on back burner
- Why did X lock my account for not providing my birthday?
About Iptegrity
Iptegrity.com is the website of Dr Monica Horten, independent policy analyst: online safety, technology and human rights. Advocating to protect the rights of the majority of law abiding citizens online. Independent expert on the Council of Europe Committee of Experts on online safety and empowerment of content creators and users. Published author, and post-doctoral scholar, with a PhD from the University of Westminster, and a DipM from the Chartered Institute of Marketing. Former telecoms journalist, experienced panelist and Chair, cited in the media eg BBC, iNews, Times, Guardian and Politico.
Online Safety
- Social media ban for kids: simple message, tough choices
- How could they ban X?
- Online Safety and the Westminster honey trap
- Shadow bans: EU and UK diverge on user redress
- Why the Online Safety Act is not fit for purpose
- Fixing the human rights failings in the Online Safety Act
- Hidden effects of the UK Online Safety Act
- Why did X lock my account for not providing my birthday?
- Online Safety Act: Ofcom’s 1700-pages of tech platform rules
- Online Safety - a non-consensual Act
- Online Safety Bill passes as US court blocks age-checks law
- Online Safety Bill: ray of hope for free speech
- National Crime Agency to run new small boats social media centre
- Online Safety Bill: does government want to snoop on your WhatsApps?
- What is content of democratic importance?