Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Dutch To Introduce Net Neutrality By Law

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the levy-playing-field dept.

The Internet 228

An anonymous reader writes "Big news out of the Netherlands this week, where a government minister announced plans to guarantee network neutrality by law. If Parliament approves the amendment to Dutch telecommunications law, and it expected to do so, it would become one of the first countries in the world to legislate against Internet providers who want to charge more for using particular applications or services."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

first =) (2)

jaunkst (2023708) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379076)

Go Net Neutrality!

In depth on the amendment (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36380126)

I just copied and pasted the first paragraph from the link in the article when submitting, but I didn't think it would be posted this way. I think some more information is required for a proper news article/discussion. Therefore, a short summary of the law in question.

For Dutch readers, here is the amendment in Dutch: https://www.bof.nl/live/wp-content/uploads/Amendement-van-het-lid-Verhoeven-c.s..pdf

Summary for English readers:

It will be forbidden by law to block or induce a bandwidth limitation on select internet IP addresses/websites/applications. Unless:
- the blocking or capping reduces congestion, but every type of service still has to be treated equally
- for the integrity or safety of the network and service of the provider
- to block unwanted communication stated that the client has explicitly asked so
- has to be done by court order

There is some more in depth information what internet access really means, and it also states that providers may block everything, providing it's for example a VoIP only subscription. It's not allowed to offer an internet subscription while blocking certain stuff, but the other way around thus still will be legal. Also it's ofcourse still allowed to give an overall bandwidth cap or monthly data cap.

All in all I think it's a pretty solid amendment. Submitted by the four left wing parties: D66, PvDA, SP and Groenlinks

Wonderful. (2, Interesting)

Zedrick (764028) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379082)

The Netherlands is truly a developed country. Too bad it's so overcrowded.

Re:Wonderful. (4, Informative)

Ironhandx (1762146) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379128)

I'm seriously considering moving there asap. Find a decent town with low crime rate and ik vil nederlandse les het goed!

Re:Wonderful. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36379330)

Find a decent town with low crime rate

Good luck with that, the country is overrun with dune coons.

Re:Wonderful. (1)

Xiph1980 (944189) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380332)

Well, not knowing where you're from, but compared to most countries I've visited, we just don't have the same crime rate. Really, the worst areas in the Netherlands aren't even close to shady areas I've seen in Paris, New York, Philadelphia or.. where-ever really, apart from Denmark and Sweden. Be prepared to pay a decent dime for housing though. Real estate isn't cheap at all in the NL..

Re:Wonderful. (1)

Ironhandx (1762146) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380430)

I come from Newfoundland. The last murder we had was in international news. That's how often it happens.

Re:Wonderful. (2)

Xiph1980 (944189) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380500)

Well, I have no idea how many murders you've got annually, but on a country of 16.7 million inhabitants, we had the following numbers of murders from 2010 to 2005: 170 / 178 / 161 / 143 / 149 / 201 so that's not too bad I think :)

Re:Wonderful. (4, Insightful)

Squiddie (1942230) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379156)

Yeah, but you would think that the "Land of The Free" would have guaranteed internet freedom much earlier than anyone else. Instead, they are busy trying to lock it down.

Re:Wonderful. (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36379254)

It was never the "land of the free to use other people's property the way I want."

It will be very interesting to see how this small scale in a first world country through government fiat experiment will work or not.

Re:Wonderful. (2)

dainbug (678555) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379760)

WTF? "Other people's property"? I was under the impression that the internet was developed by ARPA (DARPA) in 1969. (and a bunch of universities -- go bruins) with my tax dollars. Can the part that is owned by the tax payer (Government, Military, Public Universities, and the parts that were built with government subsidies) all be run the way "I" want? (We want)

Re:Wonderful. (2)

MindlessAutomata (1282944) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379814)

Of all the arguments you chose, you chose that one? Seriously, man. His argument is going to be that the ISPs own their own wire, routers, and access to them (that part of the internet) is not public anymore than your personal router and wireless or ethernet is public.

By arguing THAT, you show you don't really understand what the overall issues are about.

Re:Wonderful. (1)

Squiddie (1942230) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380456)

Except that that wire runs on public land and most of the roll-out was subsidized by taxpayers, at least in the US. Then there is the issue that many ISPs have local monopolies. They need to be regulated, and net neutrality is one way of keeping the content that runs inside their wires free. This has always been the norm, I don't know why it's so controversial now.

Re:Wonderful. (3, Insightful)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380114)

you are under the wrong impression.

DARPA took ideas from existing POTS, which already was using packet switching, then it took existing computer networks, which didn't use packet switching, and applied the packet switching and created TCP/IP.

That was the contribution - the protocol.

Now, AT&T was certainly declared a "national resource", it was given all sorts of monopoly powers by the federal government, so that was totally wrong.

However you are arguing about your ISP, not the protocol and not even the AT&T specific lines, so when you look at the fact that most of the Internet (99% of it probably) is private networks, then you can try and ask your question again.

Re:Wonderful. (4, Insightful)

AK Marc (707885) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379766)

So it's instead the land where the landowners are free to do whatever they want, and those without capital have no rights?

Re:Wonderful. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36379892)

How does network neutrality let anyone use someone else's property without an agreement? Everyone pays their ISP for service. The services work out how to fulfill their contracts with peering agreements, etc. . Why should the fact that I am asking for data from Google be handled any differently than if it was from Yahoo, or my next door neighbor?

Re:Wonderful. (2)

commodore6502 (1981532) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380296)

>>>It was never the "land of the free to use other people's property the way I want."

Except these ISPs were granted (1) use of government-owned roads and right-of-ways plus (2) monopolies. Examples: Comcast, cox, verizon. The government can regulate these ISPs for either of those 2 reasons:

1 - Because government regulates everything that runs on, or under the roads.
2 - Because government regulates monopolies like the Power company, phone company, natural gas company, and water/sewer company. The internet monopoly is no different.

Re:Wonderful. (4, Insightful)

MaskedSlacker (911878) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380342)

It was never the "land of the free to use other people's property the way I want."

Really? The history of 19th century America is the history of one group wanting to use another group's property, and doing so over, and over, and over. You must be a real American to be so ignorant of your own country's history. Off the top of my head:

Repeated relocation of Native Americans to steal their land.
Chattel Slavery (using some else's body the way I want without their consent).
Grazing rights conflicts in the west.
Water rights conflicts in the west.
Mineral/oil rights conflicts.
Railroad right-of-way conflicts.

I'm sure a few dozen more specific cases could be added.

In short, America was ALWAYS the "land of the free to use other people's property the way I want."

Re:Wonderful. (3, Interesting)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379282)

The US has always been behind the times.
Heck we didn't even invent the Bill of Rights concept. It was taken from the British, after we won the civil war. Or the concept of natural rights (invented by the Greek Stoics and Roman Senator Cicero). We're all just a a bunch of plagiarists. ;-)

Re:Wonderful. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36379302)

The civil war? Not quite...

Re:Wonderful. (3, Insightful)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379932)

Depending on how you look at it, the Revolutionary War WAS a civil war, as at that time we were part of Britain and were fighting with the main British forces. It's just that the "civil war" tag is usually only applied when the side wanting to break away loses the fight. :)

Re:Wonderful. (2)

SilentStaid (1474575) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379322)

And if we adopt this from the Dutch, I'll continue to think that even if we're stealing ideas - at least we steal some of the good ones.

Re:Wonderful. (3, Insightful)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380172)

I'll continue to think that even if we're stealing ideas - at least we steal some of the good ones.

Good ideas should be stolen with pride!
That was one of the things we learned during a week-long "team-building group brainstorm" (I jest not).

Re:Wonderful. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36380284)

Ideas can't be stolen. They can be copied and you can [falsely] claim to be the inventor. But the original creator is not deprived of the idea; merely the credit.

Re:Wonderful. (2)

kosty (52388) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379710)

"Land of The FEE..." FTFY.

Re:Wonderful. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36380200)

There is Internet freedom (libre) but not Internet freedom (gratis, as in beer). Net neutrality comes with a lot of baggage that will block certain types of content (i.e. think Chinese "firewall").

Re:Wonderful. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36379768)

Don't make fast conclusions. We've had some pretty close calls with respect to internet filtering (see bits of freedom [www.bof.nl] for more info).

Leave it to the Dutch! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36379112)

...the Internet that is.

Because without neutrality there are merely internets.

Re:Leave it to the Dutch! (2)

El_Muerte_TDS (592157) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379246)

Not so sure about that. We (the Dutch) are leading in telephone taps in the world. And local regulation is already wasting gigbaytes on mandatory ISP communications monitoring. And there have been numerous plans for CP filters and what not.

So, this is just one win in the battle.

Re:Leave it to the Dutch! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36379416)

You guys have the weirdest society.

You're progressive as hell, but you've got quite the mixed-bag of ideals and customs.

Re:Leave it to the Dutch! (1)

El_Muerte_TDS (592157) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379648)

It's the problem of true freedom, everybody gets it, even the people you don't agree with.

Although the real problem is ignorance and deceit that results in a majority vote.

Re:Leave it to the Dutch! (1)

AndyAndyAndyAndy (967043) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380090)

It's like Massachusetts.

Great job (1)

Lunaritian (2018246) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379134)

So there actually is a country where copyright holders don't rule the Internet!

Re:Great job (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36379314)

actually. no.

they have brein, they were the one that made mininova remove all copyrighted materials... that they linked to.
but at the very least they are going the right way.

Re:Great job (1)

meburke (736645) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379972)

Well, according to my friends who actually live in the Netherlands, some are US expats, it is a great place to live. There are lots of social services, so the tax rate is close to 75%. Disposable income is a fraction of what it is in the USA. Houses are extremely hard to buy. Credit is very hard to come by. Life is dull, but secure.

The cost of a car is maybe the most expensive in the world. Consumer goods, such as computers and TV's (especially big-screen tv's) are typically twice what you would pay in the US (comparable dollars/euro). So, the top-of-the-line i7 Fujitsu laptop I bought for $3K would cost me about twice that in the Netherlands. ATT charges me $80/mo for my internet connection, which is free in the Netherlands (when and where available). It would only take me 6 years to recoup the cost of my laptop by having free, net neutral internet in the Netherlands if I don't include the cost of living and the loss of comparable income.

There is no such thing as a free lunch. The problem with our telecommunications system is that it is a broken market. In a free market world, the cost of services would go down as more people buy. One of the things that causes this broken market is lack of competition. When only two providers control 80%+ and the infrastructure is closed or extremely expensive, they can squeeze us by excessive tolls. When the day comes that the highest conduits are part of your city utilities and the there are competitive pipes between cities, you may see a significant drop in price for competitive services. Strange as it may seem, the pipeline industry provides a good model of competition providing the most volume to any destination at the lowest price. I can picure a day when "bandwidth brokers" are taking minute-by-minute bids on competitive communications pipes.

Another aspect of the situation: Net neutrality is a type of price control. Price control invariably causes shortages and lower quality of service. In a net-neutral world, the only people who will have the highest quality service will be those who can afford to bypass the common market and buy the elite services. (Try hooking up to Internet2.)

Re:Great job (5, Informative)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380378)

I'm Dutch.

Sorry to inform you, you are wrong on much of what you state.

We do have great social services, second only to scandinavia AFAIK.
Taxes are not flat but range roughly from 33% to 50% depending on income with a tax-free bottom sum.
Can't compare disposable income, but from what I've know it's pretty much equal considering in the US you have to pay for a lot of things that are paid through taxes here; the amount of money we have left at the end of the month is probably quite close. More significantly we have far less economic "outliers" around here; few billionairs and few people living in poverty.
Houses ARE more expensive and since the economic crisis, credits have become somewhat more difficult.
As for dull; life is what you make of it; if your friends prefer to live a dull live around here, they can do so ;)
Cars are more expensive, but not by much (OTOH, fuel IS a lot more expensive than in the US).
Consumer goods aren't twice as expensive, perhaps some 10%-20% more expensive. Mostly because of corporate taxes. As I understand it, many US companies are able to pay $0 taxes due to creative accounting. Tax laws are a little less pro-corporate around here.
Internet isn't free, neither wired nor mobile. I don't quite know what you get for $80/mo with AT&T, but the most expensive mobile subscription for iPhone4 around here is roughly $55 a month.
AFAIK, most of the above is similar for the rest of the north and west European countries.

Re:Great job (1)

QuasiSteve (2042606) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380436)

Well, according to my friends who actually live in the Netherlands, some are US expats, it is a great place to live. There are [...]

I've seen some people say they wanted to move to NL. Probably in jest, but one good place to check if NL is right for you would be to dig into the stories and forums here:
http://www.expatica.com/nl/main.html [expatica.com]

Note that you will find many, many bitter 'expats' there. The majority of which were really just hoping to be an American living like an American, while living in NL, rather than adapting to Dutch ways. ( Note that I say 'adapting', not 'conforming'.. we're not the Borg. )

You'll also find quite a few positive posts, however.

Having read posts there occasionally for the last 8 years or so, I can say that it's a fairly reasonable resource for learning about NL, particular regions, what to expect, what you might love, what you might hate, etc.
It also has a few small sections set up to get you on your way with actually travelling to NL and migrating to NL, but the general recommendation is that you speak to an emigration handler in your home country as they know the legal rigmarole du jour.

Here's one tip.. The Dutch know English quite well, and they're not averse to speaking it as much as people in some of the other European countries. However, unless you find yourself in an international community (e.g. the British area, Polish neighborhood or China Town of one of the major cities), you're not going to find a whole lot helping you out in English - quite unlike the plethora of Spanish signs/etc. in the southern U.S., say - so take some time and effort and learn Dutch. ( I think for official immigration you're actually required to take a short Dutch exam, but a recent advisory from a commission suggested to do away with that. )

Re:Great job (1)

schuinestreeppunt (2246694) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379992)

So there actually is a country where copyright holders don't rule the Internet!

This actually is about the right to use Skype and WhatsApp. One of the largest mobile telecommunications companies in the country had plans to charge extra money for the right to use applications for VoIP or texting, and was experimenting with deep packet inspection to accomplish this.

The amendment does not provide in the right to upload copyrighted materials.

UK (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36379162)

The Netherlands, as always, proves to be a forerunner for an appropriate approach to the internet, and other leisurely activities.

Ok, that settles it (2)

Hermanas (1665329) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379172)

I'm moving to the Netherlands!

Re:Ok, that settles it (1)

erroneus (253617) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379410)

You do realize that's where Peter Pan lives right?

Re:Ok, that settles it (1)

Hermanas (1665329) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379630)

I assume you're kidding, but you've got it confused with Never Land [wikipedia.org]

Uh Oh (4, Insightful)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379568)

You won't like it you yank. Our beer got taste, our cheese is not just a barely edible plastic, our food isn't genetically manipulated, the soda contains real sugar, the women are the easiest in the world, the pot is so cheap just anyone can smoke it... eh... oh wait, I got it. We are SOCIALIST. You got to pay taxes here. Sales tax? 21%. (might 20% they keep on raising it recently).

That should scare of the Americans... well apart from the beer having taste etc etc. America is an interesting place to visit, just don't eat or drink anything that wasn't prepared by a first generation immigrant.

Re:Uh Oh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36379680)

Yea it has taste, luckily you forgot to define what kind of taste exactly... (the comment on the women is, good for the dutch, only a small exaggeration)

Regards, a neighbour from the south

Re:Uh Oh (1)

Hermanas (1665329) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379702)

Thanks for sharing. Too bad you assumed I live in America! But since you've scared off all the Americans, now I'm definitely coming, thanks!

Re:Uh Oh (1)

Bucc5062 (856482) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380128)

Not me, not scared off at all. After my first visit to Germany I was hooked and upon return, could not drink beer back home. The EU drove me to hard liquor except when I get to go back and visit. I'd move there in a moment if I could figure out how to bring my horses over, own enough land to keep them, and get to work from my home from time to time. Alas, even the EU is not that progressive.

Re:Uh Oh (1)

kermidge (2221646) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379870)

Let's see, a fifth of my income for all the goodies versus the same amount for.... I make it no contest. Do The Netherlands accept old burnt-out ex-hippies?

Re:Uh Oh (1)

DerPflanz (525793) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380040)

No, up to 52% goes to taxes via income tax (the more you make, the more you pay relatively) and of the money you have left, 20% goes also to taxes through sales tax. Then we have dog taxes, car (double) taxes, mandatory health insurance, profit taxes, parking fees, etc.

I guess it's the price to pay for civilisation.

Re:Uh Oh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36379872)

Why not use a racial slur in your rant to round it all out, pig?

Re:Uh Oh (2)

keytoe (91531) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380118)

Our beer got taste

Oakshire Brewery [oakbrew.com] : 5 minutes away.

our cheese is not just a barely edible plastic

Rogue Creamery [roguecreamery.com] and Tillamook [tillamook.com] : Both 3 hours away.

our food isn't genetically manipulated

Horton Road Organic [hortonorganics.com] : Just one of many CSAs in town.

the soda contains real sugar

I cut out soda at the same time I cut out GMO food and other 'fake foods'. So high five to you on that one :)

the women are the easiest in the world

Debatable. [uoregon.edu] There's something about 9 months of rain that causes promiscuity when the sun finally arrives.

the pot is so cheap just anyone can smoke it...

Not Legal [google.com] , but not exactly rare either if you're into that sort of thing.

Lumping all of the states into a blanket statement like that is akin to me making claims about 'All of Europe'; They're bound to be inaccurate and make me look ignorant.

Re:Uh Oh (1)

houghi (78078) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380130)

Yeah, your beer got taste compared to US beer. Compared to real beer Heineken is still piss.

Oh, I live in Belgium where the REAL beer comes from.

Re:Uh Oh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36380272)

Czech Republic here.
Say, WHERE did you say, real beer comes from [wikipedia.org] ? ^^

Re:Uh Oh (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380460)

Real beer is brewed all over the world, even in the US, in small breweries run by talented enthausiasts.
But as far as "mass consumption" beer goes, The Dutch and German beers are by far the best. (though you are free to send me a few bottles and try and prove me wrong ;)).

Re:Uh Oh (1)

blind biker (1066130) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380262)

Unfortunately, the new Dutch govt vowed to make selling pot illegal, even to Dutch citizens.

Re:Uh Oh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36380440)

I hear their men like it in the ass too. Fucking faggots.

To quote Bugs Bunny (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379188)

I like it.

(sits back to see how many recognize this 'toon)

Re:To quote Bugs Bunny (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379274)

Also a Lt. Frank Drebin quote.

Good Job! (2)

milbournosphere (1273186) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379200)

US congress, I pray that you pay attention to this. Your constitutions actually WANT this type of legislation!

Re:Good Job! (1)

SilentStaid (1474575) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379386)

While I totally agree with you, I want to point out that the Dutch are terrible offenders when it comes to phone/connection tapping.

Wrist tapper (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36379412)

US congress, I pray that you pay attention to this. Your constitutions actually WANT this type of legislation!

Sadly, it's unconstituental.

Re:Wrist tapper (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380446)

On precisely what basis is net neutrality unconstitutional?

Re:Good Job! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36379418)

constituents ;)

Re:Good Job! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36379442)

Which constituents do you mean? The constituents that matter to them don't want it. Even though those particular constituents don't vote directly...

Only a small percentage of their other constituents (e.g., voters) truly care one way or the other.

Re:Good Job! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36379550)

US congress, I pray that you pay attention to this. Your constitutions actually WANT this type of legislation!

That would be "constituents" - the Constitution is a document and, as such, has no wants.

And not all of us out here think that it would necessarily be a good idea - or more specifically, the idea is good, the implementation may be somewhat less so.

And then there's the Law of Unintended Consequences which typically don't manifest themselves until we're well on our way down that road.

The US congress has been paying attention (1)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379628)

That is why the US has invasion plans for Holland ready and had them ready for a long time.

Nothing to scare the US like a country that isn't following US doctrine all the way. Note there are no invasion plans for say North-Korea or other places that are blot on humanity but they do have invasion plans to "liberate" Americans from the International Court in The Hague by invading a friendly country.

Dear US voter, if you want your country to stop sucking, stop voting for the kind of people that let this pass. Ergo, on the voting ballot: None of the above.

This will work in most countries, most election systems require a certain percentage of the VOTERS to actually vote, enough people invalidate their vote, the elections would have to be held again rather then just going on as if legit with a majority NOT voting because non-voters are rare counted.

Re:The US congress has been paying attention (1)

Duradin (1261418) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380104)

Canada had plans to invade and capture North Dakota up until a decade or so ago.

You might want to look up WWII as to why America has had plans for how to invade Europe.

Does this still work if it is not ubiquitous (1)

softWare3ngineer (2007302) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379212)

so if an ISP is discriminating in the US (where your favorite services houses their servers) you service will still be throttled or potentially cut off. Its a good first step but net neutrality is a global problem and needs to be treated as such.

Re:Does this still work if it is not ubiquitous (2)

Obfuscant (592200) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379582)

so if an ISP is discriminating in the US (where your favorite services houses their servers) you service will still be throttled or potentially cut off.

It's pretty hard for a Dutch person to have their ISP be located in the US. Unless they use a satellite service or have a leased, undersea cable. But yes, for a US user, this DUTCH law would have no effect.

This law deals with the ISP, not the servers you deal with. Where do you get the idea that "your favorite services" are required to provide service to you? If the iTunes store or whoever wants to block your IP, they have that right. What this law, and net neutrality in general, deals with is the ISP blocking your access to certain destinations, not those destinations blocking your access to their services.

For the life of me, I have no idea why a poster upthread thought this had something to do with "copyright owners". Net neutrality has nothing to do with copyright. Zip. Nada.

Re:Does this still work if it is not ubiquitous (1)

Rolgar (556636) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380324)

He was saying if a Dutch citizen connects to a server in the U.S., the ISP that the server is connected to can throttle your traffic because they are exempt from Dutch laws.

Lesson learned (1)

robot256 (1635039) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379222)

Sounds like somebody forgot to pad their campaign checks to make up for the politicians' increased bills. Those are not the people you want to piss off with your anti-competitive money grabs.

expensive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36379228)

i live in the Netherlands,it is very expensive to live here,in the north side it is cheaper but very dull...
Also the gas price is insane,1,65 for 1 liter,drugs are cheap...

chile was the first (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36379268)

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/07/13/2056218/Chile-First-To-Approve-Net-Neutrality-Law

On the downside (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379364)

Unfortunately, they also introduced a plan [cnn.com] to make pot bars illegal for tourists.

Re:On the downside (1)

Haedrian (1676506) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379590)

Which gives you an additional reason to move there permanently.

Re:On the downside (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36380470)

Conversely, this creates a huge disincentive for many tourists to visit, but I guess a city like Amsterdam, which thrives on tourism, won't mind...

Re:On the downside (1)

Abstrackt (609015) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380100)

I knew there was a good reason I held on to my Dutch passport.

An amendment to an existing law! (1)

erroneus (253617) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379368)

What a novel idea! I am sure others have thought of this already. It has frequently been pointed out that there is already law in place which prohibits telecoms from violating neutrality principles. Why not amend that law to include ISPs? Fundamentally, I already believe those laws apply to net neutrality as I don't see enough difference between the networks to justify different laws and precedent.

Plans didn't originate with the minister (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36379466)

The minister was only "announced these plans" after a proposal by a non-government coalition of green and left-wing parties, which was shown to have the support of a large majority in parliament. The two government parties (we currently have a minority government) were (and still are) against it, but the minister realized he couldn't ignore such a large majority, and so announced that he's going to include the proposal in the overall package he's working on.

Ironically enough, the reason for the left wing parties to introduce the proposal was a too audacious attempt by the big ISP to introduce tiered service levels. That came back and bit them big time! (Let's hope ISPs in other countries don't learn from their mistake.)

Great Story (1)

DaMattster (977781) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379524)

It highlights exactly what is wrong with the United States. The US has become corrupt and full of special interests. In the US, profits trump freedom and it is a sorry shame. Good for the Dutch for doing the right thing instead of the money-making thing.

Progress is progress. (1)

Zoson (300530) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379536)

You go this way, I go that way. We'll find out which works better.

Unfortunately that's what it's going to come down to, and someone's going to suffer. That's America. Go capitalism! My quick buck at your expense.

Good thing is... (2)

MonoSynth (323007) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379610)

This idea comes frome one of the most corporate-friendly governments the country has had in a long time. The three ruling parties are all right-wing:
1. VVD: liberal, capitalist, pro privatization of state-run companies;
2. CDA: christian democrats. They're the initiators of this law;
3. PVV: anti-muslim, anti-immigration, populist. Not really part of the government, but they promised to agree on most things (except for their anti-Muslim stance).

The opposing parties are labour, socialist, environmentalist, liberal and two small christian parties.

I can't imagine why any of those parties would vote against this law (except for one or two small ones), so I would be very, very surprised if this law won't be passed.

Re:Good thing is... (2)

MonoSynth (323007) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379776)

Correction:

The law was initiated by the opposing left-wing parties (as I expected). The (CDA)minister is very supportive, but the two biggest parties both say that they will await EU research on the matter. So it's not done yet.

The telco's are not happy.

Re:Good thing is... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36380286)

3. PVV: anti-muslim, anti-immigration, populist. Not really part of the government, but they promised to agree on most things (except for their anti-Muslim stance)

Calling the PVV anti-muslim sickens me. Criticism of Islam != hating all Muslims. Stop trolling.
The party is also not anti-immigration per se, they are for immigration of "knowledge"-migrants.
Also "populist" isn't even an insult in a republic.

Re:Good thing is... (1)

tulcod (1056476) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380410)

Not calling the PVV anti-islam sickens me. They literally call the islam "a big danger", so shut the hell up with your PVV-friendly stance. They're fucking racist and they know it, now stop voting for them plzkthxbye

Re:Good thing is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36380610)

You moron. Stop equating a religion with the people who believe in it. It's possible to be a Scientologist and a nice person, while Scientology is rotten to the core. Also, since when is being against Islam a sign of racism? It's not a race. I will never stop voting for them based on strawman arguments.

Re:Good thing is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36380330)

The weird thing is that the VVD (the biggest party in the ruling coalition) is (still) against the proposal while all other parties (including the opposition) are in favour of the proposal. The proposal has actually been put on the agenda by the parliament and not by the cabinet, after KPN (the biggest telco in NL) announced plans to start charging for whatsapp and for skype. This lead to many debates/protests on several online discussion forums and to strong debates in the parliament, whereby the parliament asked the minister of telecommunications to intervene, who in first instance was very reluctant to oppose KPNs plans but after more pressure from the parliament eventually changed his standpoint. Hence the proposal for net neutrality that's now on the table and will indeed very likely be voted into law by the parliament.

Re:Good thing is... (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380540)

That being said, all but the most extremist right wing parties in the Netherlands would still be considered far left wing when positioned in the US political spectrum. (though this may partially be because the left-right distinction doesn't easily translate between different countries)

Moot point. (1)

RightSaidFred99 (874576) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379666)

Telecom companies will just move to charging by bandwidth if they need to. Telecom companies should just give up fighting net neutrality here in the US too and just say "OK, fine. We'll just raise prices considerably."

Re:Moot point. (2)

BradleyUffner (103496) | more than 3 years ago | (#36379912)

Telecom companies will just move to charging by bandwidth if they need to. Telecom companies should just give up fighting net neutrality here in the US too and just say "OK, fine. We'll just raise prices considerably."

You think ISPs are against net neutrality for bandwidth reasons? HA! They see hugely popular sites like YouTube, and FaceBook and see an opportunity for profit by charging more to access those sites. They also seem to think that they have a right to hold the bandwidth of sites that they have no agreements with hostage if they aren't paid. Or the ISP also operates their own cable network or VoIP service and wants to charge their competitors more. This is all about seeing a way to squeeze every drop of profit out of consumers and competitors that they can.

Re:Moot point. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36380270)

Good points, I agree with everything you say though I will add something. It can also be used to restrict certain types of content. Ddon't think in technical terms like bandwidth, competitors products, or quality of service, but in political terms like dissenting information, whistle-blowing, and reporting of scandals. In short terms NN can be used to implement the "Chinese firewall" in the US.

Needs to be law every ware to stop ISP fraud (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36379758)

Excellent law!
I pay for my connection with a set speed and how I use it is my business not the ISP's.
If I buy a cheese burger and try to eat all of it Micky-Ds doesn't go crying to congress about it, they make more.
If I buy 2 BK doesn't throw a tantrum they make more.
If I eat it fast Wendy doesn't get upset they make more.
I pay my money they provide the goods.
ISPs have to do the same.
An ISP should not be able to censor my connection or try to double dip by extorting content providers who pay for there connection at the other end.
If an ISP sells a service they should be able to provide it.
IPSs crying about band width hogs is fraud on there part for overselling capacity.
If they over sell capacity have to increase capacity.
An ISP throttling a connection is no different than a gas station selling a tank of gas and only giving you a fraction of what you pay for when you have the balls to actually try to use it.

More information regarding the amendment Verhoeven (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36379882)

I just copied and pasted the first paragraph from the link in the article when submitting, but I didn't think it would be posted this way. I think some more information is required for a proper news article/discussion. Therefore, a short summary of the law in question.

For Dutch readers, here is the amendment in Dutch: https://www.bof.nl/live/wp-content/uploads/Amendement-van-het-lid-Verhoeven-c.s..pdf

Summary for English readers:

It will be forbidden by law to block or induce a bandwidth limitation on select internet IP addresses/websites/applications. Unless:
- the blocking or capping reduces congestion, but every type of service still has to be treated equally
- for the integrity or safety of the network and service of the provider
- to block unwanted communication stated that the client has explicitly asked so
- has to be done by court order

There is some more in depth information what internet access really means, and it also states that providers may block everything, providing it's for example a VoIP only subscription. It's not allowed to offer an internet subscription while blocking certain stuff, but the other way around thus still will be legal. Also it's ofcourse still allowed to give an overall bandwidth cap or monthly data cap.

All in all I think it's a pretty solid amendment.

Not the normal ISP's (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36379936)

Its the mobile telco's that want to do a DPI and bill you based on that.

Freedom? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36379988)

How is this equated to more freedom? It's less freedom for the people who actually produce and deliver the services. Limiting the producers leads to stagnation of new ideas. No ISP will ever try to develop a new or unique service again because they'll be forced to allow everyone who copies them to use their network to provide the same service.

Re:Freedom? (1)

gabebear (251933) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380190)

This certainly does seem to be a step backwards to me. Will ISPs be allowed to block port 25(SMTP)? I would think ISPs will definitely have to forget about prioritization of HTTP traffic over torrent/VOIP/encrypted traffic... fun times for the Dutch... Blanket blacklist for SMTP servers in the Netherlands and choked connections for regular surfing are the first things that come to mind.

I'm interested exactly how they are proposing to guarantee net neutrality by law. There are very few details.

Sign me up! (2)

GrumpySteen (1250194) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380110)

Legalized prostitution -and- net neutrality? Immigrating to another country has never been quite so attractive.

Re:Sign me up! (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380504)

And as a result they have serious problems with human trafficking in sex slaves. The idea behind it wasn't to legalize prostitution so much as improve the lives of prostitutes. They recognized that it was unlikely that they would managed to stop it so they tried to ameliorate the situation. Unfortunately, that's just caused problems with human trafficking.

I realize that this is libertarian /., but let's not kid ourselves about the real consequences of legalized prostitution in that sense. It's not a bunch of women choosing to go into prostitution, I'm sure some do, it's more common for it to be a horrific form of exploitation. And no, I don't think that it's any less so when it's men that are selling their bodies.

Test bed. (1)

MaWeiTao (908546) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380322)

Actually, if it goes through it might be a good test bed. We'll get to see the implications of such a law, positive or negative. Although, the implementation may vary in the States and there may be different social and economic forces in play. Still, could be informative.

They'll have to compete on network quality now (1)

Xordin (66857) | more than 3 years ago | (#36380486)

Telco's are basically searching for a way to get a share of Google's profits. The plan was to introduce new subscriptions that would allow them to block Google. Unless Google agreed to pay them per search.

This wouldn't work if there was real competition. But there are just 3 telco's and they're all hurt by decreasing income form voice and sms.

This law will encourage telecoms to compete on bandwidth and network quality instead of financial trickery and monopoly abuse. Should be a good thing for consumers.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?