Category Archives: ISPs
Data Retention, Protection, and Privacy
The aim of this post is to identify a few deficiencies in both data retention and data protection laws and argue that privacy advocates and government officials to defend privacy first, approaching data protection as a tool rather than an end-in-itself. Continue reading
Analyzing the Verizon-Google Net Neutrality Framework
In this post, I exclusively work through the principles suggested by Verizon-Google. In my probationary analysis, I will draw on existing American regulatory language and lessons that might be drawn from the Canadian experience surrounding network management. My overall feel of the document published by Verizon-Google is that, in many ways, it’s very conservative insofar as it adheres to dominant North American regulatory approaches. My key suggestion is that instead of rejecting the principles laid out in their entirety that we instead carefully consider each in turn. During my examination, I should identify what principles and/or their elements could be usefully taken up into a government-backed regulatory framework that recognizes the technical, social, and economic potentials of America’s broadband networks. Continue reading
Update: Feeva, Advertising, and Privacy
d. Feeva’s adoption of privacy as a cornerstone of their business indicates a (rare) success for privacy advocates who have advocated for stronger privacy protections online; whether you agree with the success resting on the technology (where I think a success can be read), at the very least least it should be agreed that baking privacy into Feeva’s advertising-based business model is a success. Continue reading
Ole, Intellectual Property, and Taxing Canadian ISPs
se companies. At best we might feel pity as we watch them wallow in their crisis. At worst, we fear what they might crush as they roll around on the ground like starving dinosaurs and demolish other elements of civil society in their throes of panic and fear aimed at extinguishing the generativity that endangers their ontological security. They’ve already made a real mess of copyright and cultural transmission possibilities; let’s hope they don’t damage the conditions of democratic communication itself as well. Continue reading
