EU Rules Says No to Net Neutrality Rules

April 19, 2011 -

The European Commission has decided that it will not pass legislation that makes Net Neutrality principles a matter of law. Instead they said that they would rely on existing law, media coverage outing unfair practices by the telecommunications industry and consumer complaints.

"I am determined to ensure that citizens and businesses in the EU can enjoy the benefits of an open and neutral internet, without hidden restrictions and at the speeds promised by their service providers," said Neelie Kroes, vice president of the European Commission for the Digital Agenda. "I am a firm believer in the principles of competition, which are at the core of the new enhanced telecom rules on transparency, quality of service and the ability to easily switch operators."

The EU report said that there was a general consensus that traffic management is necessary to ensure the smooth flow of Internet traffic. The Commission said it and the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) would continue to monitor the sector and publish a year-end report.

"[If the report's] findings and other feedback indicate outstanding problems, the Commission will assess the need for more stringent measures."

Consumer advocates railed against the decision.

"Ms. Kroes is hiding behind false free-market arguments to do nothing at all," said Jeremie Zimmerman, a spokesman for French digital civil liberties group La Quadrature du Net.

Source: DigitalMediaWire


Comments

Re: EU Rules Says No to Net Neutrality Rules

Wow.  It's a common-sense approach, without a complete knee-jerk reaction.  In Europe, of all places.

What I don't quite understand is why this approach is being taken in the EU, and not in the United States, considering the problems that prompted the idea of the FCC trying to reclassify it's own mandate were happening far more often in EU countries than in the United States.

---

With the first link, the chain is forged.

--- With the first link, the chain is forged.

Re: EU Rules Says No to Net Neutrality Rules

The EU has actual competition in the broadband market.

Re: EU Rules Says No to Net Neutrality Rules

True, but that doesn't address my underlying point - even WITH competition, most of the problems that make people cry for NN (such as throttling down of connections for nothing more than heavy use) are much more commonplace in the EU than the US, yet the EU is taking a much more common-sense approach to NN.

I find that kind of mind-boggling.

---

With the first link, the chain is forged.

--- With the first link, the chain is forged.

Re: EU Rules Says No to Net Neutrality Rules

As was said, the competitive landscape is different.... depending on the region, consumers can either (a) go to another provider or (b) the local provider is government owned anyway.

In general the US has neither, so our situation is different.   Yes there are abuses the the EU, but people can actually DO something about them.  Here.. when Comcast decides it doesn't want Netflix to compete with its own services and degrades one's ability to use Netflix streaming, the chances of having a viable alternative are pretty low.

Granted, those 'government monopoly' ISPs are another reason NN got shot down in the EU. Governments are not interested in passing restrictions on themselves, so they lobbied to make sure the rules were not put in place.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Is King right? Should all games adopt the free-to-play model?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MaskedPixelanteNumber 3: Night Dive was brought to the attention of the public by a massive game recovery, and yet most of their released catalogue consists of games that other people did the hard work of getting re-released.04/17/2014 - 8:46pm
MaskedPixelanteNumber 2: If Humongous Entertainment wanted their stuff on Steam, why didn't they talk to their parent company, which does have a number of games published on Steam?04/17/2014 - 8:45pm
MaskedPixelanteNumber 1: When Night Dive spent the better part of a year teasing the return of true classics, having their big content dump be edutainment is kind of a kick in the stomach.04/17/2014 - 8:44pm
Matthew Wilsonhttp://www.giantbomb.com/articles/jeff-gerstmann-heads-to-new-york-takes-questions/1100-4900/ He talks about the future games press and the games industry. It is worth your time even though it is a bit long, and stay for the QA. There are some good QA04/17/2014 - 5:28pm
IanCErm so they shouldn't sell edutainment at all? Why?04/17/2014 - 4:42pm
MaskedPixelanteNot that linkable, go onto Steam and there's stuff like Pajama Sam on the front-page, courtesy of Night Dive.04/17/2014 - 4:13pm
Andrew EisenOkay, again, please, please, PLEASE get in a habit of linking to whatever you're talking about.04/17/2014 - 4:05pm
MaskedPixelanteAnother round of Night Dive teasing and promising turns out to be stupid edutainment games. Thanks for wasting all our time, guys. See you never.04/17/2014 - 3:44pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the consequences were not only foreseeable, but very likely. anyone who understood supply demand curvs knew that was going to happen. SF has been a econ/trade hub for the last hundred years.04/17/2014 - 2:45pm
Andrew EisenMixedPixelante - Would you like to expand on that?04/17/2014 - 2:43pm
MaskedPixelanteWell, I am officially done with Night Dive Studios. Unless they can bring something worthwhile back, I'm never buying another game from them.04/17/2014 - 2:29pm
PHX Corphttp://www.msnbc.com/ronan-farrow/watch/video-games-continue-to-break-the-mold-229561923638 Ronan Farrow Daily on Video games breaking the mold04/17/2014 - 2:13pm
NeenekoAh yes, because by building something nice they were just asking for people to come push them out. Consequences are protested all the time when other people are implementing them.04/17/2014 - 2:06pm
Matthew Wilsonok than they should not protest when the consequences of that choice occur.04/17/2014 - 1:06pm
NeenekoIf people want tall buildings, plenty of other cities with them. Part of freedom and markets is communities deciding what they do and do not want built in their collective space.04/17/2014 - 12:55pm
Sora-ChanI realize that they have ways getting around it, but one reason might be due to earthquakes.04/17/2014 - 4:42am
Matthew WilsonSF is a tech/ economic/ trade center it should be mostly tail building. this whole problem is because of the lack of tail buildings. How would having tail apartment buildings destroy SF? having tail buildings has not runed other cities around the US/world04/16/2014 - 10:51pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the issue is you can not build upwards anywhere in SF at the moment, and no you would not. You would bring prices to where they should have been before the market distortion. those prices are not economic or socially healthy.04/16/2014 - 10:46pm
ZippyDSMleeYou still wind up pushing people out of the non high rise aeras but tis least damage you can do all things considered.04/16/2014 - 10:26pm
ZippyDSMleeANd by mindlessly building upward you make it like every place else hurting property prices,ect,ect. You'll have to slowly segment the region into aeras where you will never build upward then alow some aeras to build upward.04/16/2014 - 10:25pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician