Divergencia Digital

The Case for Net Neutrality What’s Wrong With Obama’s Internet Policy by Marvin Ammori For all the withering criticism leveled at the White House for its botched rollout of HealthCare.gov, that debacle is not the biggest technology-related failure of Barack Obama’s presidency. That inauspicious distinction belongs to his administration’s incompetence in another area: reneging on Obama’s signature pledge to ensure “net neutrality,” the straightforward but powerful idea that Internet service providers (ISPs) should treat all traffic that goes through their networks the same. Net neutrality holds that ISPs shouldn’t offer preferential treatment to some websites over others or charge some companies arbitrary fees to reach users. By this logic, AT&T, for example, shouldn’t be allowed to grant iTunes Radio a special “fast lane” for its data while forcing Spotify to make do with choppier service. On the campaign trail in 2007, Obama called himself “a strong supporter of net

A neutral Internet—one where Internet service providers (ISPs) can’t unfairly limit our access to parts of the Net, create special fast lanes for some services, or otherwise handle data in non-neutral ways—will require more than just rules that prohibit bad conduct. We’re also going to need real transparency. Transparency is the crucial first step toward meaningful network neutrality. Without a detailed and substantive window into how providers are managing their networks, users will be unable to determine the reason why some webpages are slow to load.  New services that hope to reach those users will have a harder time figuring out if there is some artificial barrier in place, and competitors won’t know whether and how they can offer better options (assuming some kind of competitive environment exists) Fortunately, the FCC realizes how important transparency will be in ensuring a neutral Net. A key section of   the network neutrality proposal released by the FCC   last month as

"Además, Internet sirve de plataforma para la realización de otros derechos humanos como el derecho a participar en la vida cultural y a gozar de los beneficios del progreso científico y tecnológico (artículo 14 del Protocolo de San Salvador), el derecho a la educación (artículo 13 del Protocolo de San Salvador), el derecho de reunión y asociación (artículos 15 y 16 de la Convención Americana), los derechos políticos (artículo 23 de la Convención Americana), y el derecho a la salud (artículo 10 del Protocolo de San Salvador), entre otros." La Constitución de Ecuador reconoce en el artículo 16 que “ [t]odas las personas, en forma individual o colectiva, tienen derecho a: [...] [e]l acceso universal a las tecnologías de la información y comunicación” . Asamblea Constituyente. Constitución del Ecuador . 20 de octubre de 2008.  Asimismo, la Constitución de México, por su parte, establece en su artículo 6 que “ [e]l Estado garantizará el derecho de acceso a las tecnologí

Tim Wu´s testimony before the Judiciary Committee of House of Representatives of the United States

www.theglobeandmail.com Supreme Court case R. vs Spencer In its June 13, 2014 decision in R vs Spencer the Supreme Court of Canada has begun what will undoubtedly be a long process of delineating the privacy rights of Canadians’ in their online activities. The question at issue in  Spencer  is whether Canadians have a  Charter protected privacy interest in data gathered by their internet service provider (“ISP”) about their online activities. The Court answered this question in the affirmative. Mr. Spencer was the subject of a police investigation for activities related to child pornography. During the investigation, the police requested information from Mr. Spencer’s ISP, which complied with the request. The police had not obtained a search warrant for this information, and Mr. Spencer challenged the provision of the information to the police by his ISP on the grounds that it violated his  Charter  right against unreasonable search and seizure. Under section 8 of the  Charte

New York Times announces that FCC will be revising agreements between content providers and networks operators.

Texto del reglamento para el usuario de telecomunicaciones. Comentario de mediatelecom sobre alcances del nuevo reglamento de telecomunicaciones. http://www.subtel.gob.cl/noticias/5241-gobierno-anuncia-nuevo-reglamento-que-velara-por-los-derechos-de-los-usuarios-de-telecomunicaciones

Explicación de Subtel (ente regulador chileno) sobre el criterio adoptado No todos están a favor, según otros la neutralidad de red acrecienta la brecha digital.