"When you go online,
you can see the world.
Richard Pombo hates that.
So he's selling control over which sites you visit
to strangers,
gatekeepers to the Internet.
People who get to choose for you.
Pombo is selling your freedom for cash.
The freedom to read what you want,
to say what you want,
on the Internet.
Fight for your Freedom of Speech.
Save your Free Internet.
Fire Pombo."

You haven't seen ads like that in this campaign. Not on TV, radio or the web.

Because Net Neutrality never cost anyone an election. And NN advocates aren't peppering the Internet or the airwaves with independent advertising for/against candidates.

Russell Shaw doesn't expect Tuesday's US election to remove Republican control of the Senate, so doesn't expect a shift in Congress's net neutrality stance.

I'll go further.

Even if the Dems win both houses of Congress, it will not matter.

Since nobody will win on a "net neutrality" platform, no political capital will be earned for NN. So NN won't be a priority in the 2008 election. It's not like anyone tied NN to big issues like jobs, the war in Iraq, political corruption, or public morals.

And nobody raised a million dollars to advocate for net neutrality.

Just over a week ago Phil reported that Jordan's telecom regulator had ordered that Skype be blocked. It was a short-lived blockade; the decision has been reversed. According to a report from Middle East North Africa Financial News:

Director of the commission's regulatory department, Al Ansari Al Mashaqbah, confirmed yesterday that the recent decision to block Skype had been reversed.

The official told The Jordan Times that the security issues, cited as the reason for the block, had been resolved.

continue reading.....

Jordanians have been using Skype without problems for years. Until now. For example, JRBT wrote "My ISP is Batelco and it does appear to be blocked. I am unable to gain credit for skype out from Jordan I have to get a friend in uk to get it for me."

Researcher David DeBartolo confirms that Batelco blocks Skype as directed by the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission. Presumably for "security." Here's the letter from DeBartolo and the fax from the ISP.

Dear Philip,

My name is David DeBartolo, and I am an American working in Amman, Jordan. I am the chair of a nonprofit organization with colleagues in Washington, London, and Cairo. I have been using Skype to keep in touch with all of them, and it has been tremendously useful -- until two weeks ago.

At that time, I started to have severe interruptions to my Skype service here in Jordan. It is forbidden to access the Skype website, and I have even been unable to make regular Skype-to-Skype or SkypeOut calls. Other colleagues of mine in Jordan have reported similar problems. The problems abated for the last week, but have now returned.

I inquired with our ISP in Jordan, named "Batelco," and they claim that the Jordanian Telecommunications Regulatory Commission has required them to ban access to Skype's website and to its authentication server. As proof they sent me the attached fax that they received.

I called the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission, and they confirmed that they had ordered it banned, for "security reasons" responding to concerns of the government of Jordan. Most folks here don't believe this ridiculous justification; they believe that the state communications companies are upset about losing long-distance customers to Skype.

I've been told that complaints should be directed to the director of regulatory department of the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission, Dr. Al-Ansari. His email address is alansari.almashagbah@trc.gov.jo. The contact information for the commission is on the attached fax; Dr. Al-Ansari's extension is 2300.

I wanted to let you know about this issue because I am furious at the Jordanian government's self-serving decision. I hope that you will get a good blog post out of this, and that you may be able to mobilize Skype executives to officially protest the commission's decision. Jordan has a very close relationship to the US, and if they believe that Americans are upset at the decision, or that international investment will be jeopardized, they may be persuaded to change course. I also hope that you may be able to get Skype technicians working to counter whatever obstacles they have created to using Skype in Jordan.

Thank you for your time and please do not hesitate to contact me if you need any additional information.

Sincerely,

David M. DeBartolo
Fulbright Researcher, Jordan, 2006-2007
Binational Fulbright Commission
Amman, 11185
Jordan

Are you having difficulty with Skype and your ISP? Do you believe the "security" reason for blocking Skype.com?

Never wonder about the power of telephone companies. A few weeks ago Wessel van der Vyfer spoke for Telecom Namibia at the Telecoms World Africa conference on "The future prospects of the African telecoms market.. new players ... the latest strategies."

This week The Namibian's Christof Maletsky reports van der Vyfer's Telecom Namibia arranged the arrest and arraignment of five people for selling unlicensed telecom service, in this case Internet phone calls. They were operating out of three storefronts in the port city of Walvis Bay.

Jan in Malaysia comments "It makes you realise how lightly Skype got off in South Korea after it was discovered it had set up shop and was providing VoIP services without the proper licence."

Namibia's six telephones per 100 people leaves them at a competitive disadvantage. Mike at TechDirt says small countries protect their tiny telco monopolies at the expense of economic prosperity. It must be hard to trade proven cash flow for theoretical growth.

Organized crime organizations suppress competition in a market. This keeps margins high on vice goods and services. Higher prices means overall crime rates fall, some people just can't afford vices at higher rates. Organized crime trys to avoid "wars" with rivals because they are expensive and bad for business. Big Crime also stifles small time rivals who expand the market by bidding down monopolist pricing.

In theory, police would cooperate with mafiya to keep the streets clean of petty crimes that interfere with the mafiya's business. Total crime falls because monopolists will maximize profits in a smaller market at higher prices. General law and order benefits those holding monopolies on drugs, gambling, prostitution, and other steady businesses.

But there's a greater problem. Monopolies concentrate wealth and power. This leads to corrupt government.

So we write special laws that hurt organized crime. We add penalties for large quantities of drugs. We legalize big gambling to bring it out of the underground economy, producing tax income instead of fueling crime lords. We mandate property forfeiture and allow mobster surveillance. In short, we make it more expensive to do big crime and we level the playing field. You never do away with crime altogether, but you cut the concentrated cash flow that corrupts.

Which brings me to net neutrality.

Our Martin Geddes thinks little of laws and regulations supporting net neutrality.

I've said it many times before, but Network Neutrality is a treatment for the symptoms, not the causes - and it's an ineffective anti-consumer folk remedy at that. Good intentions aren't enough. ... Picking at one tiny part of the anti-competitive edifice isn't the way forward. Better to have power over suppliers through your wallet than via politicians.

I agree. In a perfect world.

But the markets are imperfect, power is already concentrated. We see the corrupting power of the largest lobbyists in Washington D.C. and other centers of political power. We see their astroturfing and other bad acts.

So we must act.

We must effect change.

We must out-innovate and out-market.

We must organize as consumers.

We must organize as citizens. We need to educate this generation's Judge Greens, the judge who broke up Ma Bell and made the mobile revolution possible.

We must lead our society to define unmediated access to the Internet as a human right, a civil right. And to react with anger and purpose to anyone who tries to tamper with that access.    

We must find allies, if not friends, in other industries. Companies that need their bits to go untrammeled. That need an Internet without gatekeepers. Companies that know how to lobby.

Like the mafia, yakuza, or bratva, the concentrated power of the telcos will fight back.

They won't fall to any one measure. So we need a theme that All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
 -- Edmund Burkedrives many measures, new ones over time, each driving the monsters toward acceptable societal norms. Perhaps the theme is liberty and freedom?

I agree with Martin that fighting the telcos with laws is hard. Maybe impossible. And not without risk.

But doing nothing is not an option. The societal consequences of giving absolute control over public assembly, public speech, over our new libraries, encyclopedias and news sources, over our civic participation and education - this is tantamount to creating a new branch of government, one without oversight, without checks, balances or accountability.

Martin, we don't have dozens or hundreds of viable suppliers in the United States. We don't have efficient markets for Internet access. And we have damning evidence of the foul intentions of these monopolists to subvert civic freedoms and rights.

So, instead of waiting for Adam Smith's invisible hand to restore rights seized by phone and cable companies, what do you think should we do? 

P.S. Dr. Magaddino, my old economics professor, challenged me to consider crime, applying supply and demand theory to social evils instead of goods.

Consider this.

I'm a cheapskate, and I'm with Tesco Mobile's prepaid plan. I hardly use my mobile except as a camera and for brief voice notes. Under $10/month expenditure.

Tesco's MVNO only offer Web (ports 80/443 HTTP/HTTPS) access on their GPRS gateway. This is a means of the host operator (in this case, O2) to segment the market and avoid competition from the MVNO for its premium customers.

Now, if you have neutrality rules, you get two unwanted effects:

• Tesco may have to close down their GPRS service, because it discriminates against service providers who happen not to use HTTP as their only protocol. The customer loses if the only type of Internet access allowed is 100% unfiltered.
• Tesco can never expand the service to, for example, allow POP email access whilst disallowing VoIP by inducing jitter and using deep packet inspection. The customer loses again -- in this case the marginal one who may even be willing to pay a little more.

continue reading.....

It Happened to Jane (1959) with Doris Day, Jack Lemmon, and Ernie Kovacs. A tycoon buys the only railroad going through a small Maine town. A local widow (Day) tries to get her live lobsters to market, but the railroad downgrades her shipments, letting lobsters die before they get to their customers.

Despite the railroad's dozens of high powered lawyers, Doris Day wins in small claims court. When the railroad won't pay, she seizes a train, and starts a PR campaign against them that includes radio, television game shows, newspaper reports, and the like. The railroad retaliates by cutting off passenger and cargo service to their small town. The townspeople try to use the seized railcar to haul their goods, including the lobsters, to New York. But the tycoon routes the train all over New England to delay it. They intentionally congest those routes with other rail cars, start construction at chokepoints, and deny water for the steam engine to further slow down the lobsters. Will they make it to the Bronx in time for the dinner time rush?

In the end, the mean tycoon's heart softens when he meets Day and her cute kids, and everyone lives happily ever after.

Sound like the network neutrality issue?

Big telecom incumbents abusing power. Playing favorites with routing. Delivering less than they're paid for, stopping innovation, and spending money on lawyers instead of upgrades.

Unlike the movie, we don't have a Doris Day to charm "the meanest man in the world." So it comes down to congress and the FCC in the United States, and similar government organs in your country. Grassroots activism seems the only course since it's nigh on impossible to out-lobby phone and cable companies.

So:

• What will you do for the Internet this week?
  
• How will you defend your right to call unimpeded? And in private?
  
• Who will you call?
  

Declan McCullagh breaks down the FBI's new Net-tapping push. Requiring manufacturers of VoIP systems (including Skype) and IM (like Skype) be as tappable as your plain old telephone system. I suppose it comes down to trust, your world view, and how you balance risks with freedoms.

Law enforcement, for example, keeps pressure on legislatures to widen authority, at the expense of citizen privacy, in the name of being efficient and effective. They form an organized lobby putting safety over liberty. Do you know of lobbies that push back the other way?

Laws makers are aware that the threats are personal. For example, this bit from the official site of Ohio Senator Mike "Coingate" DeWine (R-Ohio):

NOTE: Due to heightened security restrictions in the Senate office buildings and elsewhere on the Capitol complex, mail addressed to members of Congress continues to be significantly delayed. Mail addressed to my office must now be sent off-site for irradiation treatment and other preventative measures to ensure safety.

Those wishing to quickly contact my office are encouraged to correspond by telephone or fax. Thank you for your patience and understanding.

Senator DeWine will introduce the FBI's bill. If you're a U.S. citizen, Skype him to say the new CALEA extensions are over-the-top and intrusive. Or that you don't mind being spied on. Here are his public phone numbers. If you click them, you'll dial straight from Skype, free in the US:

• D.C. Office: (202) 224-2315
• Xenia, Ohio: (937) 376-3080
• Cincinnati, Ohio: (513) 763-8260
• Cleveland, Ohio: (216) 522-7272
• Columbus, Ohio: (614) 469-5186
• Marietta, Ohio: (740) 373-2317
• Toledo, Ohio: (419) 259-7536

This is an election year for DeWine. He is running for reelection against blogging Congressman Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio). If you think privacy and freedom should be a campaign issue, Skype Brown's campaign office at 440-282-3314 or his congressional offices: Lorain County (440) 245-5350, (440) 365-5877; Summit County (330) 865-8450; and his Washington Office (202) 225-3401.

Does making phone numbers clickable (click once to call) make you more likely to call, just for the convenience?

I guess when the fourth person contacts you for your reaction to the week's network neutrality voting in the US, it's time to say something about it.

For newcomers, my reasoning why Network Neutrality is a last resort at fighting duopoly rent seeking can be found here. I won't repeat it.

Let me re-iterate something I said back in 2004:

Over time, the architecture of the telecom system will resemble the political system around it.

The AT&T (as opposed to at&t) years reflected the military-industrial era. A "commanding height" of the Cold War was the flow of information, and just like the interstate highways. AT&T was as much a creature of the government as rational free-market economics. The break-up of AT&T as well as the 1996 act both chose to cleave the industry across the connectivity grain rather than with it. The current situation was 30 years in the making. As I rather undiplomatically stated, it's a uniquely American mess that can only be solved by a uniquely American solution.

But it's really much deeper than that. From my shallow knowledge of American history, and short exposure to American culure, I've come to the following (probably widely unwelcome and possibly wildy wrong) conclusions. Network Neutrality is just a digital-era manifestation of much longer-running sores within the American political system and psyche.

• The outcome of the Civil War was that everyone lost. No winners, not even a draw. One side lost its soul, and the other its honour. It set the stage for a fundamental change from the United States to the United State.
• The Seventeenth Amendment upset the carefully-crafted balance of power between the public, states, federal government (executive), legislature and judiciary. The US is a four-legged constitutional stool that the public is sat upon. (This may explain why it is one of -- debatably, the -- longest continuously established democracy). But it's now an uncomfortably wobbly stool.
• This set the stage for an immediate assault on personal freedom, which continues today in other forms. Competing jurisdictions would have ensured the migration of ethanolics and psychedelics to happier places.
• The same over-reaching federal state also encroached into a whole bunch of other areas it would best have been kept away from, notably communications policy.
• The rest, as they say, is history.

I can't but help enjoy the irony of the often statist/corporatist/collectivist European Union being a paragon of devolved government, competing regulatory regimes and voluntary cross-border cooperation compared to the centrally planned US communications economy.

If the FCC were tossed onto the scrap heap, and those powers returned to the states, my American friends would find that the Network Neutrality issue would rapidly cease to have any political significance. By making the prizes of Federal Telecom Lotto so big, the temptation to fiddle with the rules of the game has become overwhelming.

Anyone fancy some salty tea?

PS - Next overtly political Telepocalypse post: March 2009. I promise to keep my libertarian ways quiet until then. (Note that does mean I don't fit into US Dem/Rep political stereotypes.)
PPS - I'll probably offend lots of people, but the short version is "Nice country, great people, shame about the government." (For the UK, it's "Nice people, great country, shame about the government", and Italy is "Great people, great country, what government?" Only kidding! Calm down!)
PPPS - Comments are open ;) Set status to "published" and be damned...

UPDATE: Something many readers won't be aware of is the different ways the US and EU constitutions work. As I understand it, the commerce clause of the US constitution means that if it relates to interstate commerce (and practically everything in a networked globalised economy does), then it "goes federal" by default. In Europe, it's different. The subsidiarity principle means everything should (in theory) be done at the lowest possible level of government. Just because something has an international dimension, it doesn't mean that the EU gets full power over it. And even where the EU legislates, it merely sets out the general requirements and objectives, and each nation translates that into local law. Again, scope is retained for competing implementations and jurisdictions. I'm no fan of the eurocracy, but it's illuminating nonetheless to see the practical consequences of different constitutional frameworks.

UPDATE: That means the EU constitution is "edge-based", and the US one doesn't scale. Oops. Hey, just skip a generation and move straight to anarchism: peer-to-peer contracts, and a state whose only function is to enforce them.

Skype on your razr?
incompatible today.
SoonR might do it.

Net neutrality
astroturfed, lobbied and shelved
telcos win again

fcc taxes Vonage
maybe SkypeOut too
Save the Internet!

pick friends well, Yahoo!
AT&T messenger
now with NSA

Supernova word:
people Curate their passions
a new meme rises

Calls in US free
June promo: call the world free.
Skype teases America

Censor carefully:
Global Online Freedom Act.
Do you read Chinese?

Packard-Bell laptop
push keyboard to call
or answer the phone

Phishing in Skypeland
Suckers waiting to be fleeced
Study the handbook

Technorati Tags: politics, activism, netneutrality, askaninja, ninja, rights, ebay, skype, skypejournal, freedom, access

I'm sat in the Internet cafe in Stockholm Arlanda airport burning my last few Krona coins. Fighting with a Swedish keyboard brings back fond memories of being a code monkey in a Norwegian bank a decade ago. Anyhow, in my hotel and here I've noticed that the both seem to be using some kind of transparent proxy. If a web page doesn't load right, and a duff version is cached, you need to shift-refresh to force the 'no cache' option on.

continue reading.....

Last week, Skype changed the NorthAm VoIP landscape with free SkypeOut until year end. Skype downloads picked up right away.

This week Vonage speculators caught on about 24 hours too late. Vonage, its bankers and investors took in half a billion dollars. That'll buy them a mix of time, talent, features, and paying customers. We'll see how well they use it. 

StreamCast Networks' little litigation engine ups their lawsuit's ante by going for deep pockets, including eBay's, and naming Skype's founders in the expanded suit. Reading their complaint, they think they're facing the Sopranos. ♥ The ammended complaint (4.6MB, PDF) is full of juicy language like "fraud", "exclusive rights", "secretly siphoned-off", "conspiracy to violate the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act", "steal", "hatched a scheme", "theft", "secret disabling feature", "sweetheart deals", "hijack the 28 million Morpheus user base", "scheme", "scheme", "conspiracy to restrain trade", "pattern of racketeering", "mail and wire fraud", "are currently being aided and abetted in their efforts to fraudulently tranfer funds and properties by their families, accountants and attorneys". ♥ They say Skype's p2p technology is owned by StreamCast, and that Skype's founders cheated them out of the technology. They also say Skype lied to eBay about owning its technology free and clear, or that eBay (wink, wink, nudge, nudge). To make their case, they must pierce several corporate veils, show they had rights to the technology in the first place, prove the people and companies named messed with their rights. The parties span the globe, from Estonia to Vanuatu, but they may have enough to assert California jurisdiction. ♥ The kicker: StreamCast asked the court to shut down Skype. Right now. Protect your Skype SuperPowers! Should you tell StreamCast's management how you feel about it? Using your free or cheap SkypeOut minutes? Just by clicking on the phone numbers below? Maybe you'd say something like "Hands off my Skype, Mr. StreamCast!"? ♥ Do Skype's users have any legal standing in this?

• Michael Weiss, ceo, (818) 887-8610 x110
• Matt Neco, counsel, (818) 887-8610 x105
• Elizabeth Cowley, vp bizdev, (818) 887-8610 x108

The eBay/Yahoo deal seems healthy. Partner with a symbiote, not a parasite. Don't fuel Google's rising threat with ad dollars. ♥ It's an opportunity. Generalizing for a moment, eBay is great at making markets for goods. Yahoo! is better at making markets for intangibles, like jobs, movies, travel. Both create rich communities, but very different mechanics and cultures. As eBay uses Skype to embrace an intangibles strategy, Yahoo! could be a great partner. ♥ What happens should the Skype and Yahoo! Messenger teams swap spit? The best bits of both products could show up in the other. Might they resolve digital ID spaces and data models for users and conversations? Agree to strong interoperability for chat, voice and video? Standards for distributing in-client adverts? API co-development, blending the Yahoo!, eBay, PayPal and Skype developer communities? Together, they'd be an unbeatable team.

Skype updated Windows and Mac clients, bug fixes and repaired security problems, including a bug that exposed millions of SkypeOut call records to the NSA and other Internet snoops.

Dan Houghton, Skype's answer to Shelley Vision, started blogging about new Skypecasts.

The Skype ecology has been active too. VoIP Voice launched a new Mac phone in the UK. ♥ Actiontec is hiring a director of bizdev for VoIP products. "Actiontec is expanding its presence in the Skype Certified VoIP business! As a leader in this marketplace, Actiontec plans to capitalize on it's first to market advantage in the commercial space, and leverage it's intellectual property and strategic relationships in the VoIP adapter business. This is an exciting opportunity for a highly motivated professional to drive a huge up and coming business segment for Actiontec." If you apply, let us know what you learn. ♥ PhoneGnome to Skype came out, using the Uplink SIP to Skype Adapter.

Sometimes people ask me how I find something to write about just focusing on Skype. It's weeks like this, my friend.

Thursday morning I'll be in Lansing on a panel for the Telecommunications Association of Michigan's Politech conference.

These are mostly lobbyists from the bigger phone companies, reps from the smaller ones, and interested state legislators. What should I say to them?

First, you dare not ignore Skype and its kin. Just to get a sense of scale, here are Michigan's top 16 cities by 2003 population [on the right], collectively 2.5 million. Skype is picking up 200,000 new users per day. If all of that energy were here in Michigan, Skype would penetrate 100% your bigger cities in two weeks. And the whole state of 10 million in 50 days. Dear TAM member, how many new customers did you pick up last year? And how much did you pay for them? Skype has less than 400 employees. 

Skype/eBay is not alone. Microsoft Vista comes to a desktop near you later this year. Watch adoption of their Windows Live Messenger with voice and video. What's Microsoft's installed base in your geography?

Your response may be to respond in kind. Everyone and their brother is licensing or building up their softphones. Others are creating consumer non-PC VoIP solutions through Skype or softphones embedded in home phones. Yet others are following Skype onto mobiles or leapfrogging them. Are you used to competing in a very crowded market?

In a very crowded market, how will customers choose? What are the drivers of consumer choice in the world of Skype, QQ (the largest single-language IM/voice network on Earth), and AOL? What are their goals? The risks they're managing? If you answer cost containment, you're right, of course. But that just gets their attention.

So, this shift is big, it's real, it's happening now, and it's affecting your customers' relationship with you. More to come.

I'm looking forward to blogging the Conversations that develop from the sessions at mesh 2006 tomorrow and Tuesday. With featured Conversation Mentors such as Om Malik, Michael Geist, Steve Rubel and Paul Kedrosky there should evovle some interesing perspectives on how the a Web 2.0 world will evolve.

Mark is getting excited in preparing over the weekend, he says:

I couldn't help but think that we are a long way from a cold winter night a few months ago at the Paddock Tavern when someone raised the idea of putting on a conference. Little did we know what we were getting ourselves into! I'm looking forward to meshing as much as possible so if you see me wondering around, please introduce yourself.

As a media sponsor, Skype Journal will be reporting back daily with a particular focus on how Web 2.0/Voice 2.0 can be integrated into, impact and influence a public beyond the geeksphere.