Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Internet Government Technology

Chile First To Approve Net Neutrality Law 293

Posted by kdawson
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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Chile First To Approve Net Neutrality Law

Comments Filter:
  • Re:OK (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Barrinmw (1791848) on Tuesday July 13, 2010 @05:27PM (#32893746)
    I love how a second world nation is further ahead with ensuring the freedoms of its people then the United States. How about we just add an amendment to the constitution that replaces all references of "people" to "corporations".
  • One Page bill (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Attila Dimedici (1036002) on Tuesday July 13, 2010 @05:36PM (#32893872)
    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.
  • by bsDaemon (87307) on Tuesday July 13, 2010 @05:37PM (#32893880)

    No, I don't work for Comcast. My work would be much less popular with the Slashdot community, but I can't really discuss it anyway. But, just to play devil's advocate, 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. 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.

  • Re:OK (Score:5, Interesting)

    by PopeRatzo (965947) * on Tuesday July 13, 2010 @05:43PM (#32893930) Homepage Journal

    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.

  • by commodore64_love (1445365) on Tuesday July 13, 2010 @06:14PM (#32894202) Journal

    >>>when someone tries to block child pornography, for example, you are not witnessing some horrible slippery slope to fascism

    (1) Possession of children having sex should be no more illegal than possession of murdered people. You did not commit the crime. The molester or murderer is the one who committed the crime and should be arrested, not you for mere possession of an image.

    (2) Neither should parents be arrested for posting photos of their family trip to the nudist or topless beach. But it has happened.

    (3) Neither should artists be arrested for creating DRAWINGS of children in sex act. There's no victim; hence no crime.

  • by LordLucless (582312) on Tuesday July 13, 2010 @06:28PM (#32894300)

    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.

  • by kabloom (755503) on Tuesday July 13, 2010 @07:26PM (#32894620) Homepage

    But I use my personal web server as part of my network-centric cloud storage system -- I ssh into my machine and move files I need into public_html, then I can download them from my web browser. You got a problem with that?

  • by baileydau (1037622) on Tuesday July 13, 2010 @07:35PM (#32894654)

    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.

  • by euphemistic (1850880) on Tuesday July 13, 2010 @08:11PM (#32894858)
    I'd just like to point out that the Australian regulation you describe is proposed legislation only and does NOT currently exist as law. I know the world at the moment wants to paint Australian internet law as an example of terribleness (and it is a terrible idea), but you should probably hold off until the regulation actually exists. I too wonder about the ambiguous word "legitimate" and worry about the potential it has for creative interpretation - but lets not get ahead of ourselves and decry the concept of regulation in its entirety - especially when it seems to be upholding the rights of its citizens for now.
  • Re:OK (Score:3, Interesting)

    by vbraga (228124) on Tuesday July 13, 2010 @08:17PM (#32894890) Journal

    I'm fully invested in Brazil - I'm Brazilian and my company - the single asset I have - is here :)

    South America is not threat for the US because it's been largely an irrelevant continent for the last two decades. This is first year of high GDP growth (for the last two decades) in Brazil - and the year with highest current account deficit. Also, the smallest federal government budget surplus - if you take in account investments and debt payments it's a deficit, actually.

    Although I believe there's more room for growth in Brazil there are structural problems that I suspect will not be surpassed. Infrastructure is shit: roads are in a terrible state, railways are a joke, airports are from the 70s and, well, seaports are going fine, overall. Right now there's a truck tire shortage - almost no new trucks are going out the factories due to lack of tires. In a country where over 90% of goods are transported through trucks. It's almost scary.

    The country is theoretically a welfare state but both public health and education are a a very poor state and used only by the most poor. So, you end paying taxes like if you lived in Sweden but receive government services like if you lived in Botswana. And if you think the US government spends too much in pork projects, you never seen a Brazilian budget.

    Maybe the grass is always greener on the neighbor side of the fence but if I had enough surplus money to take it outside the country I'd put it in the US. Even with a crises, the United States is here to stay.

    Back in the 18th century the colonial Portuguese government closed all the textiles factories in Brazil - the country would only have factories again almost two centuries later. Brazilians did nothing. Meanwhile in the North, for unfair taxes, the Americans fought their independence and changed the world.

    There's much more to America than economy or contemporary politics.

  • by correnos (1727834) on Tuesday July 13, 2010 @08:53PM (#32895078)
    I have a linux machine at home running an ssh server. I like this, it allows a lot of flexibility in what I do anywhere. This constitutes a web server. I would also like to get a personal website running soon as a place to host projects. Does any of this make me a small business? No? That's right, and I shouldn't have to pay the fees of a small business customer for home use.
  • by Flyerman (1728812) on Tuesday July 13, 2010 @09:18PM (#32895220) Journal
    I believe you are missing the point. WHO does this identification of attackers? Is it ISPs? Is it the government? Is it a third-party blacklist? Regardless of who it is, once they have the power, it will be abused. And if you rely on user complaints to lead you to the cause, you're probably relying too much on the capabilities of civilians.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 13, 2010 @09:43PM (#32895368)

    this has zero to do with allowing malware or opening ports, jackass. It has everything to do with not allowing you to spontaneously throttle a client's connection with no reason provided.

    If there's a botnet, cut them off. Nothing in net neutrality concepts prevent this nor does it have anything to do with it. Or, I don't know, call your customer and let them know? That's not a new concept.

    This isn't saying that people can't prevent bad things. It's saying you can't discriminate aka anticompetitive.

  • by DarwinSurvivor (1752106) on Wednesday July 14, 2010 @03:14AM (#32896930)
    Just out of curiosity why not just use scp...?

A language that doesn't have everything is actually easier to program in than some that do. -- Dennis M. Ritchie

Working...