Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Chile First To Approve Net Neutrality Law

Posted by kdawson on from the pathbreaker dept.

Sir Mal Fet writes "Chile has become the first country in the world to approve, by 100 votes in favor and one abstention, a law guaranteeing net neutrality (Google translation; Spanish original). The law states [submitter's translation]: 'No [ISP] can block, interfere with, discriminate, hinder, nor restrict the right of any Internet user of using, send, receive or offer any content, application, or legitimate service through the Internet, as well as any activity or legitimate use conducted through the Internet.' The law also has articles that force ISPs to provide parental control tools, clarify contracts, guarantee users' privacy and safety when surfing, and forbids them to restrict any liberty whatsoever. This is a major advance in the legislation of the country regarding the Web, when until last year almost anything that was performed online was considered illegal."

26 of 293 comments (clear)

  1. I love the wording in the above translation. by pecosdave · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The "send" part eludes most U.S. discussions. Most major ISPs in the US block many outgoing ports to prevent you from running a server. What I do with my bandwidth is my business thank you very much, including serving up HTML.

    --
    The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    1. Re:I love the wording in the above translation. by pecosdave · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Do you work for Verizon?

      --
      The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    2. Re:I love the wording in the above translation. by rmaureira · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There's a catch in the project tho', in one of the paragraphs says: "May not limit the right of a user to enter or use any class of instruments, devices or appliances on the network, provided they are legal and that they do not damage or harm the network or service quality." The last line can be used by ISPs saying that you're "damaging the network" with your computer. Now we need to wait for the government to pass the law, and then enforce it.

    3. Re:I love the wording in the above translation. by pecosdave · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You work for Comcast don't you?

      I ran my own server off of SouthWestern Bell then later Time Warner for years with not a single spam message bounced off my server, nor issue from it. Seriously, hosting the occasional Fark photoshop pic and having a photo album hosted on my own equipment with passwords for my family along with a small vanity site, where's the problem with that? I did it for years and find it nearly impossible to do now because of people with your mindset.

      I know a lot of people abuse it and run porn sites and push malware, but I shouldn't have to pay the price for them.

      --
      The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    4. Re:I love the wording in the above translation. by Baseclass · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why must I be a business to need a web server? I'm a hobbyist.
      I'm paying for bandwidth, it's really none of their business how I utilize said bandwidth.

      --
      ^^vv<><>BA
    5. Re:I love the wording in the above translation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Residential customers don't need a web server, though.

      You are not competent to decide that for me, and neither is my ISP.

    6. Re:I love the wording in the above translation. by commodore64_love · · Score: 3, Insightful

      >>>legitimate service through the Internet

      I worry about this part of the law. The word legitimate will eventually be used by follow-up laws (or overzealous police) to exclude:

      - Peer-2-Peer
      - Nudist websites
      - Photos of your kids
      - Hate websites like KKK.org
      - So-called hate site like Teaparty.org
      -
      - Downloading software to emulate ancient Atari or Sega or NES games
      - Sites that don't adhere to the new Internet Fairness Doctrine (don't present both sides of a story)
      - Downloading nude women that APPEAR to be younger than 18 (see Australia where 20-something women can't post photos, because they have A-sized breasts)
      - Downloading women who actually are younger than 18, but not committing any crime (such as topless photos from Brazilian or European beaches)
      - And so on.

      Government regulation brings *chains* not freedom

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    7. Re:I love the wording in the above translation. by turbidostato · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "if, say, port 80 traffic were completely unfettered in a bi-directional manner and incomming connections were allowed without a previously established outgoing connection, chances are quite high that would be abused by malware authors for command-and-control and botnet node intercommunication."

      Still *my* problem, neither yours nor the ISP's.

      "I don't think that's much of a stretch at all, and its not as if the typical end user is going to know or care to secure their node."

      Why he should? What are the consecuences of his malpractices? If you fuck it up you pay for the mop seems a sensible policy. But even then, still my f* problem, neither yours nor the ISP's.

    8. Re:I love the wording in the above translation. by turbidostato · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "The last line can be used by ISPs saying that you're "damaging the network""

      And they previous one can be used by any lobbying party to get off with whatever they want.

      ""May not limit the right of a user to enter or use any class of instruments, devices or appliances on the network, provided they are legal"

      So they just need to, say, declare illegal connecting more than one computer to a "single computer" connection and there you go.

      "and that they do not damage or harm the network or service quality"

      Oh, and by they way, trying to use 100% of bandwith as shown in the contract terms harms the service quality since we oversell it 100 to 1.

    9. Re:I love the wording in the above translation. by pecosdave · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Listen in many countries we have laws protecting our freedom to do as we please. Yes, it's debatable rather we really have those freedoms or not, but that's beside the point.

      One thing that we generally have laws about is our personal freedoms end at the point that we utilize them to restrict someone else's freedom.

      If you're botnet infested you are out there doing denial of service attacks and trying to hack other systems into joining your bot net. At this point your freedom is being used in an attempt to restrict someone else's freedom.

      That's what jails are for, or in this case being cut off until you fix it.

      I see no "one rule for you, one for the rest of us" as you say. I see "don't attack someone else". Don't attack someone else is a pretty good rule I think.

      --
      The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    10. Re:I love the wording in the above translation. by LordLucless · · Score: 5, Interesting

      So do what my ISP does (Australian, not US). By default, ports 80 and 25 are blocked. If I want to open them, I log into my ISP, hit up my control panel, and turn off filtering. I've been running my own servers on my Internode connection for years.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    11. Re:I love the wording in the above translation. by icebraining · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What's the problem with open proxies? Tor is an open proxy, do you want to ban it too?

      --
      Dilbert RSS feed
    12. Re:I love the wording in the above translation. by baileydau · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Or what about an user-configurable firewall at the ISP? Have it block port 80 by default, but any user who wants to use it can simply go to the web site and enable the port.

      Exactly.

      That's what my ISP does (in Australia). You can run all the servers you want with them. It's your connection. But they do want you to explicitly turn it on. I think that is a Good Thing (TM), especially for port 25.

      --
      Ever stop to think ... and forget to start again?
  2. OK by koan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What Chile does: (what looks like) Decent Net Neutrality
    What America does: Massachusetts Bids To Restrict Internet Indecency

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    1. Re:OK by bsDaemon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      From the Nixon administration through the first half of Bush 41's term, Chile had Augusto Pinochet, a military dictator. They might tend to look at freedom with slightly less jaded eyes than Americans who have had it "too good for too long." Small things like that can tend to have major effects on perspective. Just saying.

    2. Re:OK by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      What Chile does: (what looks like) Decent Net Neutrality

      I'm telling you, there's a real progressive wind blowing through South America. Brazil, Chile, Argentina and others are moving to the Left and having great success. There economies are growing and it's not just the rich that are doing better. Socially, they've got a long way to go, but at least they're moving in the right direction, using the European socialist model as a starting point, not an end in itself.

      We're going to read a lot in the coming few years about the success stories in the Southern Hemisphere. They're going to be a shining example for what free societies can look like in the 21st century: prosperous, fair and free.

      Even Hugo Chavez, who has gone off the rails as is common among very strong politicians who have great success, did a great deal of good for his country before he got drunk on power. But he'll be gone soon and there's a healthy crop of decent leaders waiting to take over.

      Don't think for a second that the financial and social successes in South America don't scare the hell out of the USA.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re:OK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      i'm chilean, chile isn't in the way of a welfare state (european model) that you are saying, currently we are beeing driven by a right goverment with strong individualist values ( i am fine with that) , argentina has big BIG problem on their laws bu brazil you're right they seems to be doing OK

      also mother is from venezuela , i had lived there for 6 months and i can tell you, chavez is a monkey, and thes rest of the politicians ain't any better, they don't have electricity even for the hospital , not even talk about the current implementation of net neutralities there

      so next time if you want to JUSTIFY the goals of some country saying that is because the leftty politics that they have , better just STFU intead of looking like and idiot

      excuse my poor english

    4. Re:OK by andita · · Score: 4, Informative

      ^.^Nice you point this topic. It is funny how this convo has turned up in a US's self talking..as usual. Please, i do not mean any offense with this, but it is just this thinking which kind of confuse me. I`m chilean. I have been in the states and i should say in many southamerican countries and it is so not like you imagine the rest of the world, specially southamerican countries. Why? because you live in fear. It is true that we had Pinochet 40 years ago, painful period of our lives, but eventhough we do not forget we can still forgive and start over. I`m not saying that everything is good, just saying that we move on. ... I as going to say many things, but i think you wont read them... While in US i was in a really nice place, there werent even afroamerican people, just native americans, still the way of comunicating with others was really different. I was treated like a princess, really good, and like if anything could happen to me at any moment (i should say overprotected since i was without my family there but i wasnt underage ) "Do not get out alone because someone can kidnap you" "Do not greet someone you dont know coz they can be a pervert or u wont be greeted back" "do not conect to internet in the pool of the place because someone can get into ur files through internet and get dome personal info from your computer" etc... i couldnt eve go to the club alone coz someone coul "put sth on my drinks" and do anything. It is a general fear in people that you cant see in any southamerican countries [excepting when u are a tourist in Favelas/brasil or amazonas /venezuela-colombia]. But in the rest of countries like Chile, argentina, peru, etc,you normally see children late at night playing, or in summer time people jst go to the beach at nigth and children, teenagers and people in general can walk at any time in the cities, go to dowtown alone, travel by public transportation from one city to another, or from home to the inner city or to anywhere without any problems... ["Never take a bus in the US" is what Americans told me] So, if we talk about freedom, i think that you should start thinking what "real" freedom is. I went backpacking last february with my best friend down to the south, 20 days in which we walked in the road, meet people, hitchhike from truck drivers to horse carts... and we finish our trip without even falling into the ground once. THAT isFREEDOM and safety. What we are getting with this new law is stating the bases to also give more security to people as well. After this law is completely updated and applied there will be improvements to it, such as grooming hunting, etc. Perhaps we are not as advance as US and not as fast developed since both US and Chile are 200 indepent countries, (We r kind of slow) but still we are trying to do our best. (Thanks Daemon) Sorry my poor english..it`s been a while since i dont practice writing or speaking.

  3. Key Fickle Phrase by Aldanga · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "No [ISP] can block... legitimate use conducted through the Internet."

    Anybody else see the problem here?

  4. One Page bill by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I looked at the translation of the bill and it appears to be a one page bill. I only skimmed it, but I can support such a bill. There's no place to hide things in it. Unlike the "net neutrality" bills that have been introduced in the U.S. Congress.

    --
    The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  5. Re:Why net neutrality is bad... by Barrinmw · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So you are saying that the people in areas with 1-2 ISPs will be able to switch to a different ISP that doesn't restrict traffic? Have you ever noticed how when one gas station raises their prices, the one directly across the street raises theirs to the same? Its not collusion but its price fixing. ISPs will do the same exact thing. Comcast goes, hey Wave Broadband is filtering out Torrents, we are gonna do it too to save money, people can complain but where they gonna go?

  6. Re:Why net neutrality is bad... by tofubeer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Net neutrality doesn't prevent charging based on usage (which is what they should be doing). Note that that is different than charging based on sites accessed or protocols used. ISPs should not be degrading P2P traffic, or restricting access to sites, what they should be doing is charging users based on their consumption.

  7. Re:Why net neutrality is bad... by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If net neutrality was implemented it WILL WITH CERTAINTY increase internet costs for all users

    Did it ever occur to you that some of us would be willing to pay more for untampered internet?

    And it's not just about peer2peer tampering. It's about all traffic shaping - streaming videos, playing video games, etc. Some of us would like to have unrestricted access. We already put up with the bandwidth issues during high traffic times - but you'll still be shaped in low traffic times. (Which, we might add, there is more low and mid-low traffic times then there are high and mid-high traffic times).

    You mention how Net Neutrality will offer more choices (those with tampering and those without). Currently, for most people, there are two options, Suck and suck harder.

    How could more options be worse?

  8. Redefines "Third World Country" by aaandre · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The term used to be associated with "impoverished." Now it is more like "laws not yet fully rewritten by and for corporations."

    1. Re:Redefines "Third World Country" by maxwell+demon · · Score: 3, Funny

      The term used to be associated with "impoverished." Now it is more like "laws not yet fully rewritten by and for corporations."

      That's still impoverished. See, the corporations there don't even have enough money to buy laws!

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  9. Re:Safety and liberty? by AHuxley · · Score: 3, Informative

    Your packets arrive at the same time as any other service, not "belling" p2p at set times.
    No slowing, hidden caps on some ports ect.
    Privacy would protect your usage logs, name, maybe data in transit from a Google like collection and storage when exposed.
    You have the liberty to not use the net, use a consumer account, server quality account or any other isp offering at any price you like with any fine print.
    Just your details are safe from 3rd parties, your packets will not be slowed.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"