my own private I dunno: résumé | screenplays | fan fiction

AT&T proud to announce it will decide what bits of the Internet you can see

| | comments (6)

Um, what? And by that I mean to say, What the fuck?:

During a panel discussion at the Las Vegas Consumer Electronics Show, AT&T’s top lobbyist said the company was ready to implement new technologies that would allow it to inspect and filter Web traffic....

According to public statements, their rationale for playing traffic cop is to ferret out pirated content: sniffing through our digital packets for material that infringe on copyright.

But the technology can be used for other purposes, and the phone giant has shown that it has no qualms invading our communications to hand over our private records to government, or censor speech or block service “without prior notice and for any reason or no reason.”...

AT&T has also touted plans to become gatekeepers to the Web with public relations bromides about “shaping” Web traffic to better serve the needs of an evolving Internet.

Who the hell died and put AT&T in charge of deciding who should see what on the Internet?

Peer-to-peer traffic is spreading via popular technologies like BitTorrent and Gnutella, which allow users to upload and share videos, music and other rich media without a middleman or content gatekeeper. The bulk of this traffic is legal.

Also at the Las Vegas panel was NBC Universal’s general counsel Rick Cotton, who told the Times that the volume of peer-to-peer traffic online was “overwhelming.”
“That clearly should not be an acceptable, continuing status,” Cotton said, and AT&T seems more than happy to step in.

So, AT&T has decided that you should not be to share legal files directly with other independent Internet users. And its spokespeople are willing to say this out loud, in public, on the record.

It makes you wonder what really nefarious stuff the corp is keeping secret. And it makes you wonder why the hell anyone would choose AT&T as their ISP.

(Technorati tags: , )

6 Comments

http://www.phawker.com/2008/01/09/thats-comcastic-cable-monolith-facing-177-trillion-in-fcc-fines-for-internet-interference/ might be considered relevant here. Also: if they are making any effort to block illegal material, they lose their common carrier status, and you can blame them for any illegal material that reaches you...
It's called (non) 'net neutrality. Their reasoning is that they spent a large amount of money building those pipes and therefore they want the right to control how they're used. And they've spent even more money on lobbyists to make sure the government agrees with them. Comcast is being accused of the same thing. What's fracked about the whole thing is that they could just as easily say we are not selling high badnwidth anymore to residential subscribers, and look, traffic gets reduced to "reasonable" levels. The problem is they do want to provide faster service, but only for *their* video (say "the fan" at comcast.net) or possibly for video email. Right now they're selling fast service, and it's being used, but not for the websites Comcast wants. I'm shocked, shocked, I say.
Unfortunately, it's not just a matter of choosing At&T as your ISP; as a major telco, they own and control a big chunk of the backbone infrastructure of the internet as well. Fuckers.
Oy. What sucks for me is that I work for that evil empire. Ick.
Their reasoning is that they spent a large amount of money building those pipes and therefore they want the right to control how they're used.
Their "reasoning" is bullshit. The pipes were built with all sorts of public money -- through direct taxes and fees and through tax abatements and the like. AT&T doesn't own the pipes any more than the companies that laid the slab concrete own the interstate highway system. Or any more than the TV networks own the public airwaves. But all concept of "public good" has gone out the window in recent years. As long as the government that supposedly works for us is working for the giant corporations, nothing will change.
Agreed on our corporatocracy. More ashamed by the collection of spineless dems who allowed retro-immunity to pass today. Having large amounts of money does not give corporations rights over the commons. At least Barack voted against it. He's actually read the constitution - good for him.

Leave a comment


I'm MaryAnn Johanson, writer and editor, and this is my scratch pad, idea-jotter-downer, portfolio and resume, and general hang-out blog.

• film/TV/pop culture critic at FlickFilosopher.com
• contributor, Film.com
• member, Online Film Critics Society
• member, Alliance of Women Film Journalists
• member, International Academy of Digital Arts and Sciences

[become a Facebook fan]
[visit my personal Facebook page]
[follow me on Twitter]


Location: New York City
[email me]

photo by David Speranza

archives

recently at FlickFilosopher.com

Powered by Movable Type 5.01

what I’m watching
(region 1)

what I’m watching
(region 2)

what I’m reading



my book
(Amazon U.S.)

my book
(Amazon U.K.)