AT&T's Blue Room Censors Pearl Jam > !

!

You are right. This was an event on the at&t web site and they can do anything they want with the content they send based on whatever agreements they made with Lollapalooza.

It wasn't censorship.

If Pearl Jam feels that AT&T or Lollapalooza violated some terms of their contract, they of course have the right to sue them in court and get whatever damages are in the contract for NOT broadcasting their content as is.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page

reply to Michieru2

reply to bmn
Lets not merge the issues into one big one alright?

Censorship is one thing, scrambling bits over decisions made by a company is another.

We can say the original net neutrality issue is for ISPs to offer premium content while keeping the content of other providers at original speeds.

So if I had a 3Mbps connection all content will flow at that rate regardless of destination, while if I use the ISPs service my speed jumps from 3Mbps to 10Mbps to get the content faster and with better quality because it's a in network connection that does not waste cash passing by through peering points and the service reliability can be determined because they operate it.

A company should have the right to decide if incoming or outgoing traffic is harming their network in any which way or form. But this is an issue entirely on itself. This is not about providing content anymore but monitoring content flowing through their network.

Also if you read the TOS and they stated they have the right to block sites they might find offensive or a "threat" to AT&T they can legally block you no matter how many stones you throw at their windows at night.

Sometimes you need to make sacrifices to make companies change the way they think. Amp'd was a mistake for just that, since nobody paid their bills the company has declared bankruptcy.

So if you are so worried about "freedom" and "censorship" you will not pay your bill and encourage others who believe in what they believe to cut on their luxury and let the company starve itself and send you to collections.

You don't need to pay a thing, just don't answer the phone and they will simply affect your credit history but who cares when you already have credit cards and you can go on your merry way doing other things.

So when AT&T sees that nobody is paying their bills they will hit a huge loss, will have to pay their own bills either way and will kill any profits for that month and as anyone else they won't be able to pay their own bills to the utility companies for running all of their equipment.

This world lives with too much luxury, everyone wants gain without sacrifice, time to get with the program because that's just fantasy.
--
Duct tape, saving lives since 1942.

reply to texans20

reply to fAcEtIOUs
"This was an event on the at&t web site and they can do anything they want with the content they send based on whatever agreements they made with Lollapalooza.

It wasn't censorship."

...IMHO, you have missed the entire point of the debate here, which is in fact a very blatant form of censorship.

They (Blue room site) plainly state that what you are able to view is LIVE and may contain possibly objectionable material. If they are gutless enough to purposely interfere otherwise, then that is what one would deem "censorship" as described by standard English referenced above by another poster...

Bands themselves are not likely contracted directly in ANY way with AT&T except via an agreement w/the concert promoters. It'd be interesting to see what exactly the bands agree to as far as the BlueRoom is concerned.

reply to Michieru2

"The problem with that section of the ToS is that it is ENTIRELY subjective. There is no objective basis to determine what is or is not offensive. This type of language in contracts and ToS needs to be removed. Decisions that determine offensiveness have no factual basis."

That's the point, contracts are made so that the company does not screw themselves over by having total control, even when they promise certain things. So a customers won't sue them to death because customers do screw over companies and the last thing any company wants to do is end up paying their customers.

"Preaching to the choir here..."

Too bad the choir is more than half deaf already, and don't have the balls or the tits to cut back on their luxurious life for the sake of something that should be "right".

If AT&T is the people's enemy stop feeding the thing, you cut their supply lines, they are now left with the resources that are left. You put the enemy into a bind and all their factories, must still run in order to survive, so they must use those now sacred left over resources. Eventually their defenses fall and you weakened them to the point that they are willing to negotiate or change their ways.

A company without money is not a company at all.
--
Duct tape, saving lives since 1942.

I am just ranting, it's not directed at you personally but it's something I think you should know about how people think these days.
--
Duct tape, saving lives since 1942.

reply to fAcEtIOUs
It certainly was censorship, whether "they have the right" or not.
--
"Speak for yourself "Chadmaster" - lesopp