On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 8:12 AM, rupert THURNER <rupert.thurner(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
Am 26.08.2013 18:14 schrieb "Andre Engels"
<andreengels(a)gmail.com>om>:
Dutch telecommunication law, article 7.4a (the
net neutrality article),
paragraph 3:
"Aanbieders van internettoegangsdiensten stellen de hoogte van tarieven
voor internettoegangsdiensten niet afhankelijk van de diensten en
toepassingen die via deze diensten worden aangeboden of gebruikt."
"Offerers of internet access services do not make the tariffs for
internet
access services dependent on the services and
applications that are
offered
or used via these services."
If an isp offers Wikipedia for free, and some other internet usage not,
then it has a different tariff dependent on the service that is offered.
Andre, this means Wikipedia Zero is illegal in Dutch law, and WMF
actively promotes illegal deals? The Swiss proposal btw looks the
same, as well the intention of the German law seems similar.
Well, they are not illegal, as they do not fall under Dutch jurisdiction.
As i see it "illegal" does not mean
necessarily "immoral" or "bad
intention". And of course we (or at least i) are heavily biased
because we think there is nothing better than Wikipedia, and there is
nothing better if everybody on this world is able to get it for free.
For me personally, it is a moral question. As specified above, it's not
illegal for the simple reason that it's not been rolled out or planned in
countries with net neutrality laws as far as I know. To me the question is:
Even if it is not illegal, is it a good idea from a moral standpoint? I
don't think WMF has spoken out about net neutrality, but undoubtedly many
people within our movement stand behind it. If the WMF would endorse net
neutrality, and if Wikipedia Zero would break it, then supporting Wikipedia
Zero would be hypocritical. For me personally, the solution is to stand for
a more relaxed definition of net neutrality, where giving an alternative or
better service for specific services is not problematic as long as this
does not adversely affect service for other services. YMMV.
--
André Engels, andreengels(a)gmail.com