<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.newamerica.net/blog" xmlns:dc="
http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>Network Neutrality</title>
 <link>http://www.newamerica.net/blog/topics/network-neutrality</link>
 <description>The taxonomy view with a depth of 0.</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>A New Wrinkle for Neutrality Debate </title>
 <link>http://www.newamerica.net/blog/wireless-future/2008/bit-wrinkle-neutrality-debate-7137</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;An interesting post from &lt;a href=&quot;http://news.cnet.com/8301-13739_3-10043040-46.html?part=rss&amp;amp;subj=news&amp;amp;tag=2547-1_3-0-5&quot;&gt;Chris Sogohian&lt;/a&gt;: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;Now that the FCC has delivered a &lt;a href=&quot;http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10021222-38.html&quot; title=&quot;FCC finalizes Comcast&#039;s filtering penalties -- Wednesday, Aug 20, 2008&quot;&gt;smackdown to Comcast&lt;/a&gt; for its sketchy anti-BitTorrent activities, it&#039;s about time that some other company stepped up to the plate and breathed life into the Net neutrality debate. Surveillance State is happy to report that the Walt Disney-owned ESPN sports network, through its selective blocking of people from particular Internet service providers, may very well wake the sleeping giant that is Net neutrality.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Customers of AT&amp;amp;T DSL and Verizon&#039;s Fios services, along with approximately 20 more ISPs, can have free, 24-hour per day access to ESPN&#039;s exclusive sports content. Customers of Comcast, Cox, and hundreds of other ISPs, both big and small, are left out in the cold--forbidden to access content that ESPN has, via exclusive contracts, guaranteed that you cannot obtain via any other means in the U.S.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;
</description>
 <comments>http://www.newamerica.net/blog/wireless-future/2008/bit-wrinkle-neutrality-debate-7137#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/blog/which-blog/wireless-future">Wireless Future</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/blog/topics/network-neutrality">Network Neutrality</category>
 <pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2008 19:40:00 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Ben Lennett</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">7137 at http://www.newamerica.net/blog</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Beware of What You Download </title>
 <link>http://www.newamerica.net/blog/wireless-future/2008/beware-what-you-download-6639</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt; An interesting critique from &lt;a href=&quot;http://gigaom.com/2008/08/28/comcast-makes-metered-broadband-official-beware-what-you-download/#comment-896323&quot;&gt;Om Malik &lt;/a&gt;on Comcast&#039;s spectrum caps: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;If the company essentially thinks that 250 GB is a lot of bandwidth, then why impose a cap at all? After all, their &lt;a href=&quot;http://gigaom.com/2008/07/22/comcast-clarifies-its-network-management-efforts-again/&quot;&gt;CTO claimed in an interview with Stacey&lt;/a&gt; that an average consumer takes up about 2 GB of data transfer every month. I think they are being typical Comcast — indulging in selective truths.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;
</description>
 <comments>http://www.newamerica.net/blog/wireless-future/2008/beware-what-you-download-6639#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/blog/which-blog/wireless-future">Wireless Future</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/blog/topics/broadband">Broadband</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/blog/topics/network-neutrality">Network Neutrality</category>
 <pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 15:55:00 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Wireless Future</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">6639 at http://www.newamerica.net/blog</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
