Search:  

 
 
   News
newer
story category Obama Picks New FTC Boss, Former MPAA Lobbyist
Leibowitz will be more pro-consumer, will probably focus on privacy...
(old news - 06:00PM Tuesday Feb 24 2009)
tags: legal · business · Op/Ed · privacy · Politics
When it came to consumer issues like broadband, network neutrality or user privacy, the FTC in recent years has spent most of its time nodding dumbly at industry, allowing carriers, content and ad companies to "self-regulate" (code for do as little as possible, but put on a good show). Today Obama appointed current Democratic FTC Commissioner Jon Leibowitz (FCC bio, Wikipedia entry) to head the agency, likely paving the way toward a more active and consumer-centric FTC -- at least on some issues.


That wouldn't be particularly hard. The FTC's recent reports on broadband competition have been lambasted by consumer advocates for lacking original research of any kind, and FTC roundtables on broadband issues have been notable only for their lack of consumer advocates. FTC reports on concepts like network neutrality or privacy largely regurgitate carrier talking points, and the FTC rarely sees a merger or acquisition they don't like.

In contrast, Leibowitz didn't like that Comcast and Time Warner Cable were allowed to gobble up Adelphia cable systems without conditions. He's fought against state-level bans on municipal broadband. On the issue of network neutrality, Leibowitz has stated he seeks a "balanced" approach, but his speeches (pdf) on the issue are at best ambiguous about new laws.

One area where Leibowitz is clear about his desire for new regulation is on the online privacy and behavioral advertising front. That could spell trouble for a new effort by the phone companies to create a system of new voluntary rules governing behavioral advertising, allowing them to sell your browsing data (to firms like NebuAD or Phorm) without having to worry about privacy or wiretap liability. He has supported the creation of new opt-in laws in this area, previously highlighting the Can Spam Act as a success (it wasn't).

For four years before joining the FTC, Leibowitz was a lobbyist for the Motion Picture Association Of America (MPAA). While Leibowitz's full intent on new regulation isn't clear, consumer advocates see him as an upgrade.

"Leibowitz will help transform what has been a largely anemic regulatory watchdog during the Bush years into an agency that sees its first priority as consumer protection," Jeff Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy, tells CNET. "Public interest groups such as mine appreciate that Leibowitz has called for tougher online privacy safeguards, and that his door has always been open."

Related:
  1. Effort To Scuttle Telecom Immunity Push Fails
  2. Embarq: Selling User Browsing Data 'Empowers' Users
  3. No, Obama Isn't Taking Over The Internets
  4. Verizon: We're Not Setting Broadband Definition Bar Low
  5. Verizon Named Most Trusted Company With Your Privacy. Really?
  6. FCC To Announce New Net Neutrality Rules Monday
  7. What Network Neutrality Is REALLY About
  8. AT&T: Google Is The Enemy Of Nuns
Forums » Obama Picks New FTC Boss, Former MPAA Lobbyist
view: topics flat text 
Post a:
Raz3000

join:2006-05-07
Chicago, IL

Net Neutrality advocate.

Seems like a good choice. Good luck Jon!
me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO

Re: Net Neutrality advocate.

I agree, +1.

Matt
Gone playing Dragon Age Origins
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC

Re: Net Neutrality advocate.

said by me1212 See Profile :

I agree, +1.
+2. This is a good choice.
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

Re: Net Neutrality advocate.

and Net Neutrality means higher HSI prices and caps in the end. Be careful what you wish for. Your providers will make it come true.

Matt
Gone playing Dragon Age Origins
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..

Re: Net Neutrality advocate.

said by hottboiinnc See Profile :

and Net Neutrality means higher HSI prices and caps in the end. Be careful what you wish for. Your providers will make it come true.
Only the convoluted definition does. Treating all traffic fairly and equally or applying non-discriminatory shaping (ala Comcast) is a perfectly valid way to manage a network.
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

Re: Net Neutrality advocate.

and capping will become the way. and higher bills will go along with it.

Also the FTC for years has never done anything. Especially as far as Can Spam Act. HA! i get more spam since that damn thing.
Lazlow

join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO

Re: Net Neutrality advocate.

hottboiinnc

If you have not noticed most of the ISPs are either capping now or have already been running test markets to see how to actually do it.

The reality is that monthly caps do nothing to address congestion issues, for pure HSI systems they do nothing(vs video concerns). As has been pointed out already, a true proticol agnostic QOS system used during peak time only, does address the congestion problem. The throttling should only be used in the short term (until network upgrades can be done).
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
·Time Warner Cable
·buckeye cable

Re: Net Neutrality advocate.

so you think you should have full run of your ISPs network and little Johnny next door should be able to run P2P full speed all day all night and make your internet suffer? or how about the server farm down the street using a residential connection instead of paying for a business connection?
Lazlow

join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO

Re: Net Neutrality advocate.

hottboiinnc

That is not even close to what I said. What I said was that as long as a user is not causing congestion (downloading during peak hours) they should be able to download as much as they want. Since most commercial bandwidth is sold by the 95th percentile method(basically by peak Mbps) it costs the ISP nothing extra. No, the ISP's TOS already covers the server farm(reselling your connection). On top of that, the server's peak times would likely be the same as the ISPs peak times, so they would still be hit by the throttle.
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
·Time Warner Cable
·buckeye cable

Re: Net Neutrality advocate.

how do you figure it would cost them nothing more to give you full non-peak bandwidth? everyone would save everything to that point and max the connection out. By giving a full hard cap it actually reduces their cost in bandwidth and allows them to put that extra money back in to the network.

If they were really smart though all of the cable companies would peer together and reduce their costs that way. Especially since ATDN is peered with several companies including media. Comcast would save $$$$ by sending that traffic to RR's network. and RR would save $$ on their backend by sending email directed to Comcast customers direct to them. Wouldn't have to offload anything to L3 or anyone else.

And by the way i know how most bandwidth is purchased.
Lazlow

join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO

Re: Net Neutrality advocate.

hottboiinnc

If you know how they buy their bandwidth, you would know that it is by the 95th percentile method(most commercial bandwidth is sold this way). The 95th percentile method(google 95th percentile bandwidth) charges based on PEAK bandwidth and not total GB. Since downloading during off peak hours by definition occurs during non peak times, there is no additional transit costs. Since all the hardware has to be there to handle peak traffic hours, there are no additional hardware costs either. So how does downloading during off peak hours cost the ISP anything (on the HSI side)? It doesn't.
Lazlow

join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO

Re: Net Neutrality advocate.

hottboinnc

"you have only paid for access to THEIR network NOT to the Internet."

Are you absolutely nuts? No one is paying for access for anything on an ISPs network. They are paying for access to the INTERNET. What is there on your ISP's network that you are willing to pay $50+ a month for? Essentially nothing. We are paying for access to the internet and the untold resources that it provides.
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
·Time Warner Cable
·buckeye cable

Re: Net Neutrality advocate.

No you pay to ACCESS THE PROVIDERS network who happens to be connected to the Internet. They do NOT have to give you the Internet. They can give you a Portal the same as AOL did and thats it. Will you take it most likely not. But you only pay to access their line, just one of the perks you get in return is the WWW.

And i doubt everyone pays $50+ per month. My brother in CA pays $35 on DSL and $30 per month on Comcast. I pay $44 for Buckeye Cable in my area. My aunt pays $35 per month with RoadRunner on the TWC side. My father pays $30 with RoadRunner on TWC side. $50 per month always? NO! Oh i also have grandparents who pay Comcast $44 for internet. I don't see $50 anywhere in those numbers do you?

And again- you pay the provider access to THEIR network. Not to the Internet. They built their network, they manage their network, they can do with it what they want. If you don't like it, build one yourself and compete. and we'll see how fast your network become's the "customers internet"
dentman42

join:2001-10-02
Columbus, OH
·AT&T Midwest

Re: Net Neutrality advocate.

said by hottboiinnc See Profile :

No you pay to ACCESS THE PROVIDERS network who happens to be connected to the Internet. They do NOT have to give you the Internet.
You are SO full of it. My broadband provider advertises their service as fast access to the INTERNET. I most certainly AM paying for access to the Internet. In fact, I got in during beta testing where the ISP's network didn't have any content - not even a mail server! In fact, most of them advertise as broadband Internet. The days of advertising such a connection as a content provider were over when AOheLl fell apart.

Yes, you're using their network, but their network is primarily sold as a pipe to the Internet.

nonpeak

@emaildl.com

If everyone saved until that point wouldn't that make that the new peak time? If everyone maxes out a connection it seems to me that would disqualify it for non-peak.

Providing a hard cap may slightly reduce their total bandwidth usage over a period of time but by their own admission only 2% of users would even reach said cap. I don't see them going much over it (using comcast's cap as an example). And they are companies, don't be so naive as to think they'll invest extra money into their infrastructure. Extra money mostly goes to employees (higher ups) or REQUIRED upgrades to keep up with competition.
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
·Time Warner Cable
·buckeye cable

Re: Net Neutrality advocate.

you don't count Boost as an upgrade? Wifi from Cablevision? SDV by cable companies, DOCSIS 2.0 that Adelphia put their entire network on instead of 1.0 or 1.1?

My cable provider has 2.0 and 3.0 coming out within the next year. Those are upgrades. Also look at speed that is not being released those are upgrades. New modems are upgrades. Don't forget your tech support that is sometimes based in your area.

Not all companies take the profit and give bonuses and not all companies have "competition" especially Ohio. WOOO 1.5Meg dsl compared to 8meg cable? Who are you really going to pick? or 12meg cable compared-uncapped unthrottled compared to 1.5meg DSL.

DJMASACRE

join:2008-05-27
Nepean, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Bell Sympatico

said by hottboiinnc See Profile :

so you think you should have full run of your ISPs network and little Johnny next door should be able to run P2P full speed all day all night and make your internet suffer? or how about the server farm down the street using a residential connection instead of paying for a business connection?
Yes because that is bullshit . p2p users dont make your "internet suffer" get it through your head. This is just what the ISPs want you to think to make it seem ok . Do your research .
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
·Time Warner Cable
·buckeye cable

Re: Net Neutrality advocate.

No P2P can slow your connection down. It sucks bandwidth from your actual pipe to the backbone.

It does show on cable and it would show on DSL back at the DSLAM. Since BOTH connections ARE SHARED you would see it. Maybe on DSL not on the speed test between you and the DSLAM/CO/RT you would see it once it hits the net as the actual ATM line would be filling up.

RARPSL

join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY

said by Lazlow See Profile :

hottboiinnc
The throttling should only be used in the short term (until network upgrades can be done).
If they get done since once throttling gets introduced, the need to do anything such as make network upgrades becomes a non-issue because there is no preceived need on the ISP's part to do it (ie: Throttling has "fixed" the problem). They can keep ripping off the customer without delivering what they are being paid for.
Lazlow

join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO

1 edit

Re: Net Neutrality advocate.

RARPSL

I agree that it is a slippery slope that will have to be watched closely, that is why I added the short term part.

You are aware that they are already throttling?

RARPSL

join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY

Re: Net Neutrality advocate.

said by Lazlow See Profile :

RARPSL

I agree that it is a slippery slope that will have to be watched closely, that is why I added the short term part.

You are aware that they are already throttling?
Throttling is a Bandaid not a Fix. So long as they go the route of Throttling, they reduce (or eliminate) the pressure to actually fix the problem (ie: By doing needed network upgrades). Since Throttling is a minimal cost option (and they have a captive set of customers due to being the exclusive cable provider in the area) they have no incentive to actually spend money to do network upgrades - Which is not to say that they will not use some petty cash to SEEM to be doing something, but only pointing out that without the Throttling Option, there would be a more urgent need to actually do something to fix the problem.
openbox9

join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
I call BS on the "ISPs won't upgrade their networks, they'll implement caps instead" argument? What has been the ISPs' motivation to date for upgrading their infrastructure?
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
·Time Warner Cable
·buckeye cable

You are getting what you paid for even if they are throttling and capping. Why you have only paid for access to THEIR network NOT to the Internet. They just give you access to the Internet, its just an added bonus you paid for. Their network their right to throttle and or cap as they wish.

Instead people on here sit and cry and whine when they don't get their way.

BF69

join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN

Re: Net Neutrality advocate.

said by hottboiinnc See Profile :

Why you have only paid for access to THEIR network NOT to the Internet.
Sorry they are called ISPs. Internet Service Providers. NOT NSPs

Show me where it says NETWORK access. Everything on this page talks about INTERNET.

»www.charter.com/Visitors/Product···nuItem=3

Please continue to show your ignorance.
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
·Time Warner Cable
·buckeye cable

Re: Net Neutrality advocate.

They may provide the Internet over the network THEY OWN but do not have to give you access to it. AOL was considered and still is an ISP but they provided NETWORK access.

Same can be with cable or DSL. Just because a page says they give you access to the internet does not mean they have to if they change their mind at a later date. You pay to access the network and lease that line, they say what you get and how much of it you get.

If you don't like it don't do business with them, how how about go build your own network.

Geowil_loggedoff

@cox.net

Re: Net Neutrality advocate.

i have to aggree with everyone else on this.

you are not getting access to the ISP's network, you or getting access to the internet over their equipment (rt's co' and routers, switches, all that networky stuff) and not to their network.

Routers only route traffic, they do not serve as a true network server, they just direct the traffic, like a stop light.

We do not pay for access to the ISP's servers, which is where the network really is, so in keeping with the traffic light metaphor,

what you're suggesting is that we pay for access tot he control boxes to the traffic lights.

We dont, all we pay for is marginally unfettered access to the net.

Now, Web Hosts are a different story, but that's not what this discussion is about, but Web Hosts are a perfect example of what you think an Isp is.

tired

@emaildl.com

Give me a break. You expect us to believe that everyone is really just paying for access to their individual networks (which of course aren't intermeshed) and the ISPs are being generous by allowing us onto the rest of the internet?

They would be out of business if they didn't "allow us" onto the internet.

fireflier
Coffee. . .Need Coffee
Premium
join:2001-05-25
Limbo
·Skype

said by hottboiinnc See Profile :

and capping will become the way. and higher bills will go along with it.
Yes because that's not happening at all NOW. . .
--
Tradition: Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid. --despair.com
me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO

Re: Net Neutrality advocate.

If we don't want caps we can get the business conection, just sayin'. I would, and then I would cancle TV and get a nextfilx sub and then put hulu and netflix(are there anyother legal IPTV sites>) on my start up bar.
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
·Time Warner Cable
·buckeye cable

internet prices for the most part have stayed the same, especially cable. The only ones that like to play with the rates are DSL providers.

You can't say that Comcast has had a rate increase on their HSI product recently that put it well above what it used to be. The only thing that they raise is the cost of tv services, which offset the price of giving you lower cost to access the network for Internet.

n2jtx

join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY
·Optimum Online

said by hottboiinnc See Profile :

and capping will become the way. and higher bills will go along with it.
You mean things are not going to change from the way they are now? It seems that every week there is another story about a carrier imposing caps and raising fees. They are doing already without any prodding from the FTC.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears.
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
·Time Warner Cable
·buckeye cable

Re: Net Neutrality advocate.

see above.

Also if you don't like it go build your own ISP and see how much it costs you.

Also i think the FTC needs to make ATT Lower their POTS line service because its too high. Especially when I can get a POTS service for $20 including taxes which includes unlimited calls in my area code 419/567. I don't see ATT doing that. Maybe we need to have them checked out- But then again- they won't be since all the nice things they do for the Feds.
ashworth

join:2001-10-06
Pittsburgh, PA
A touch of sarcasm, I hope, any MPAA lobbyist is no friend here.

BabyBear
Keep wise ...with Night-Owl

join:2007-01-11

Pro-sumer?

Hmm, a former MPAA lobbyist considered pro-consumer?? Have I stepped into Jerry Seinfeld's 'bizzaro' world? Up is down, black is white and a MPAA lobbyist is on a consumers side!??

See 12 replies to this post

tad2020

join:2007-07-17
Orange, CA

1 edit

What the....

Whats with Obama filling up parts of the government with ex-RIAA and ex-MPAA dudes?

See 22 replies to this post

MalibuMaxx

join:2007-02-06
Chesterton, IN

Dunno

if this is good or bad... will see... I could see it go both ways...
me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO

Re: Dunno

"I could see it go both ways"

What couldn't?(so can anything else)

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest

The question is, will he push ...

... an even more unbalanced copyright situation, or will he side with Consumers on issues such as Capping, overages and "traffic management."

I'd say it's a coin toss. Jury is out on this one. I'd like to think #2.... but I feel #1 is more likely.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

See 7 replies to this post

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK

Hmmm... Reminds me of.....



Heroes, Stargate Atlantis....

S_engineer

join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL
·Comcast

Re: Hmmm... Reminds me of.....

I was thinking they plucked him from "law and order"

Cheese
Premium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
clubs:

Re: Hmmm... Reminds me of.....

I was thinking more along the lines of...

tad2020

join:2007-07-17
Orange, CA

Re: Hmmm... Reminds me of.....

Looks like the child those 3 would have made :S

geowil_offline

@cox.net

LOL Darth Helmet...... good god i love Spaceballs, one of my favorite movies but I hardly watch it anymore due to the fact that when i got the flu a few years back i watched SB about 46 times (essentially two and a half weeks out of the three i was sick for).

kamm

join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY

ANOTHER paid industry parasite, only this time paid by MPAA?

Wow, this was the LAST THING WE NEEDED...

See 8 replies to this post

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

One Important Question Remains Unanswered

Did this guy pay his taxes?
--
Blagojevich / Madoff 2012!
GhostDoggy

join:2005-05-11
Duluth, GA

Re: One Important Question Remains Unanswered

And can he prove every bit of content in his home is paid for?

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast

Re: One Important Question Remains Unanswered

said by GhostDoggy See Profile :

And can he prove every bit of content in his home is paid for?
Sounds reasonable to me!
--
Blagojevich / Madoff 2012!
moonpuppy

join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
Of course he didn't. How else do you think he got nominated.


Somnambul33t
L33t.
Premium
join:2002-12-05
Mullica Hill, NJ
clubs:

"No lobbyists in my administration!"

"just kidding!", then he does the Bush smirk-laugh.

What happened to Laissez-faire????? the country was founded on hands-off capitalism yet it's full of bureaucratic regulation BS that only drives up prices...

SRFireside

join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX

Re: "No lobbyists in my administration!"

Before shooting your mouth off like this maybe you should revisit the rules Obama said he would follow. The former lobbyist has to have not been lobbying for two years on similar issues that he was appointed for. Show me when Leibowitz was lobbying for the MPAA and show me it was less than two years ago.

\seriously... show me. I don't know when this guy did what.

knightofnii

@cox.net

Re: "No lobbyists in my administration!"

uhh, unless I am mistaken, the topic title says FORMER mpaa lobbyist, meaning he is no longer lobbying for the mpaa, therefore Obama did not go back on his promise in this case.

Murdoc

join:2009-02-08
Manitowoc, WI

nothing good is gonna come out of this.

Lets see how more messed up this country gets in 4 years.

digitalfreak

join:2005-12-09
49533

Re: nothing good is gonna come out of this.

Not as badly as in the last 8.
chronoss2009

join:2008-09-23

go ahead attack this left wing person

yaaa mpaa now runs the US alike i told ya biden is doing his job , obama whose that, change for what. ya good analogy above
SPARE CHANGE TO CORPORATES.

get ready for what comes now americans you asked for it.

broadbndgeek
Premium
join:2000-08-03
Graham, WA

Re: go ahead attack this left wing person

they did vote for change...rofl

broadbndgeek
Premium
join:2000-08-03
Graham, WA

another lobbyist

what happen to a NO LOBBYIST Washington? That NOBAMA is a hack.
Forums » Obama Picks New FTC Boss, Former MPAA Lobbyist


Sunday, 08-Nov 12:33:37 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.republican-creole