About as much use as a chocolate teapot.
MEPs voted against changes to net neutrality rules in the European Union on Tuesday lunchtime. It comes after key internet figures, including the creator of the World Wide Web, Tim Berners Lee, warned EU politicos not to wave through the regulations without amendments due to a number of loopholes in the proposed law. …
"I read that article as a positive outcome from the MEPs. They voted against dumbing down the rules with amendments."
I had assumed the same. Rejecting amendments is what Sir Tim et al were after and they have had their wish granted.
Any greater minds available to enlighten our possible ignorance?
This humble mind saw that the rules allow corporates too much wiggle room and open the door to abuses. The amendments were aimed at closing these loop holes and leaving the protests until last minute was a ploy aimed at causing enough doubt so that the MEP's would allow the amendments.
However, failing to vote for the amendments means that the rules go through, complete with loop holes.
The BBC report on this did quote an academic from the UK as saying that this outcome is no surprise given the number of agencies that worked towards the rules in their current form, to then delay the rules to look through yet another set of issues; and that the rules also contained the necessary bits and pieces to deliver the end of roaming charges in Europe by 2017 hence there were extra reasons to make sure the rules went through in order to deliver this.
So, long story short, the rules were so long in coming, that nobody wanted to delay them, even though there are gaping holes in there. ... at least that is how I read it. I could very easily have the short end of a very confusing stick.
There is always the chance that the issue will be looked at again, though. I can't think that this is the end of the matter. I can believe that the MEP's will wait a few years to see that everyone's fears are real; that the corporates (no surprise) make maximum use of the loop holes, and then decided to legislate to close the holes ... maybe twenty years down the line...
"..and that the rules also contained the necessary bits and pieces to deliver the end of roaming charges in Europe by 2017..."
I saw that strange linkage of different topics into one set of rules, I would of have expected MEP's to have had the sense to split the two vastly different measures; just goes to show that the EU plays exactly the same tricks as the UK Parliament.
If you read the article linked in the second paragraph re: Sir Tim it makes things a bit clearer; basically the legislation is already weak/Swiss cheese and the campaigners wanted the amendments.
The wording of this article is either really poor or the author has misunderstood the sequence of events.
Which is typical of journalism today.
I half expect the body to not remotely have anything to do with the headline on most occasions.
The world wide web is dieing of a horrible dirty disease called "Journalism"
Dont confuse this with "the internet" we learned in school the difference between the 2.
Having voted for the rules, do the MEPs have a further vote/input when the regulations have been drawn up?
The regulations themselves could (though not guaranteed?) close the loopholes.
And what about when the regulations are turned into member country law, will there be an input/amendment by national parliaments then
Sadly, in future, our democratically elected (or self-appointed) representatives will be making ever more decisions on technical matters, from positions of near total ignorance.
Journalistic media will pontificate on the same matters, from similar positions of near total ignorance. And the outcomes will be equally injurious to the longer term interests of society as a whole.
In an increasingly complex world, why do we persist in believing in the ability of those with no technical understanding to make technical decisions on our behalf? And how should such decisions be made?
Not just ignorance, but potentially excessive timeboxing.
If I'm correct in my reading of the EU calendar:
It would seem that they only allocated 1.5 hours to consider both net neutrality and roaming charges.
Or is the UK GOV ignoring this in light of #Brexit?
The principle of USO is morally correct, however the devil is in the detail.
Have they got it right? Probably not (yet). The principle of a starting point and then review later can be a good approach.
What is going to happen to roaming charges post #Brexit?
I bet given the power of the big commercial interested here and their quiet and persistent lobbying, we (the UK consumer) will get SCREWED !!!
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019