Fairpoint Pledges To Violate Net Neutrality
wytcld writes "Fairpoint Communications, which has taken over Verizon's landline business in Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont, has announced that on February 6, 'AOL, Yahoo! and MSN subscribers will continue to have access to content but will no longer be able to access their e-mail through the third-party Web site. Instead, Yahoo! and other third-party e-mail will be accessed directly at the MyFairPoint.net portal.' Since Verizon spun off its lines to Fairpoint in a maneuver that got debt off of Verizon's balance sheets by saddling Fairpoint with it, there was concern by the public service boards of the three states about how Fairpoint would deal with that debt. Fairpoint's profit plan: force all Webmail users through Fairpoint's portal, by blocking all direct access to Webmail portals other than its own. Will Fairpoint's own search engine portal be next? What can stop them?"
Did anyone read the article???
Verizon provided a service to IT'S customers where they can read webmail of another provider on their web page. Fairpoint is saying that after x date that if you still want that kind of service you have to go through THEIR web page. You can still go to Yahoo, Gmail, AOL, and Hotmail, and read your mail from those pages directly.
This is NOT a net neutrality issue. It is an added feature provided by the provider.
I for instance have NEVER used any of my ISP features, as I have separate email provider. Nothing Changes.
Shenanigans!
Happy New Year
And as someone currently in NH who lived in VT for most of his life, I'll point out that, by and large, the only people who actually believe in those mottos are growing-pot-on-the-porch hippie types that nobody takes seriously, and suffice to say aren't exactly internet-savvy.
FWIW, I did see a bumper sticker on a Verizon service van saying something to the general effect of "Fairpoint is the only company worse than we are!" and had to agree. Even still, you're lucky to have one option for a broadband provider in many parts of VT and NH, let alone two. I can't speak for Maine but assume it's about the same.
HOWEVER, after looking at TFA (ignore sig, please), it looks like a quote has been pulled wildly out of context:
Sounds like all that's going to happen is Verizon will be killing off their portal which was previously doing some level of integration w/ AOL, Y!, and MSN, and those who have been bought out by Fairpoint will no longer be able to use it. Which makes sense, as they're no longer Verizon customers.
How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
I got their mailer and here what it says :
Yahoo!, AOL and MSN or Other Third-Party Portal Users
On Jan 31, 2009, you'll still have access to Yahoo!, AOL, and MSN content, but you'll no longer be able to access your email directly through the third-party portal. Instead, you'll now have access to the new MyFairPoint.net portal.
Beginning January 1, 2009, we'll start the migration of all Verizon-Yahoo! emails and settings to your new FairPoint WebMail account. You'll be able to access your FairPoint WebMail on this date, but your Verizon-Yahoo! messages may not be transferred until later in the month. Please check your new inbox periodically to find out when your messages are moved. The migration is expected to be complete by January 31, 2009.
"As soon as an ISP blocks that, they are not providing the internet they promised and lose common carrier status and the legal benefits it occurs by staying neutral and not checking what web pages are retrieved.'
Can't lose what they never had. ISPs don't have, and aren't required to have, common carrier status; the idea was floated, but they shot it down because, frankly, it would cost an awful lot of money and create criminal penalties for failing to meet service guidelines. They DO get some protections from the DMCA safe harbor provisions which are similar to those given to common carriers, but they are slightly different and DO NOT require ISPs to retain any sort of common carrier status.
Basically, common carrier is achieved by guaranteeing that transmissions will be delivered to the intended recipient without any sort of interference or monitoring on the part of the carrier, as well as meeting certain requirements for uptime and maintenance, and the free provision of service for the purpose of emergency communications (ie. 911 calls), and the protection given is that common carriers cannot be prosecuted for any crimes which are committed with the use of their services no matter how heinous or large in scale. The safe harbor provisions are achieved simply by connecting users to the internet, and only grant protection from civil suits regarding copyright infringement by users on their large and potentially semi-monitored (there are rules regarding monitoring, but they do not forbid all monitoring of traffic, merely on taking action with regards to certain aspects of it) network.
Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
If you read far enough down in the replies, you'll find out that the entire Slashdot story is completely bogus. They're shutting down access to Verizon's web portal. Users will get their ISP email from a different site. Users of MSN, Yahoo, etc. will no longer be able to use those services' IMAP support to get their email from Verizon because the company is no longer part of Verizon. Therefore, if they are using a third-party site to access their Verizon email, they will now have to use the Fairpoint webmail interface for their webmail.
This, of course, raises questions about why they can't just use IMAP from the Fairpoint servers, which probably implies that the new Fairpoint service doesn't provide IMAP from outside the network, but while that would suck, it's hardly on the same scale as blocking web portals to dozens of web-based email services, some of which cannot realistically be re-served using a Fairpoint web front end because they don't provide IMAP..... The "violate net neutrality" interpretation of the article makes absolutely zero sense....
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.