Tania Groth of For Freedom Denmark interview, day after Christmas March

Net Neutrality: How the FCC Could Kill Call of Duty – Learn Liberty

CATO Institute: Net Neutrality, Obama and Oatmeal (Berin Szoka)

Here is some food for thought:

What do you think?

John Oliver (HBO): Net Neutrality


Net Neutrality in the US: Now What?

Brilliantly explained!



Internet Citizens: Defend Net Neutrality


The Fight Against the Copyright Lobby Is Part of the War for Freedom Of Speech!

I have said this often – and in many ways.

I have lamented the disconnect that exists between the people who fight for civil liberties in general and freedom of speech in particular and those who are battling the copyright trolls and those hardly audible voices that are trying to raise alarm about the abuse of patent laws.

Part of the problem – in my never-humble-opinion is that each of these groups comes from a completely different sphere of interest/infuence and, for all practical purposes, from different cultures.

They do not dress alike.

They do not follow the same trends in popular culture.

They do not agree on what ‘societal norms’ are today.

They do not read the same news sources.

And – perhaps most importantly – they do not use language the same way:  not only do they not use the same words to express themselves, when they do use ‘common’ words, they do not use them in the same sense.

Example:  when Canadian Free Speech acvocate Ezra Levant was being sued for defamation by an HRC troll by the name of Vigna, one of the ‘defamatory’ statements was that Mr. Levant accused Mr. Vigna of ‘hacking’.  The judge then started a bit of a lengthy discussion about what does the term ‘hacking’ really mean:  the consensus – undisputed by Mr. Levant’s sounsel – was that ‘hacking’ implies an illegal act!

Sitting in the audience, I came close to screaming out:  it does no such thing!!!

‘Hacking’ simply means ‘an innovative use of existing code/coding’!

I can easily say that I ‘hacked together’ a new app from bits of code I had from before:  no illegal activiy implied!  Sure, many people can use hacking for illegal purposes, but ‘cracking a problem’ is not the same as ‘cracking a safe’ – so the word ‘cracking’ does not, in itself, have illegal connotations.

Same with ‘hacking’.

BTW:  Mr. Levant was found to have defamed Mr. Vigna for saying he had ‘hacked’ something…

No wonder that the first two groups (civil libertarians/free speachers and anti-copyright-people) as ureasonable and weird…  (The last group is perhaps less distasteful to each of the first two, but, being mostly scientists, they are just not that great at communicating just how dire the situation really is….they are trained to overcome problems – not bitch about them:  so, that is what they do.  Which does not mean the problem is not there and is not desctroying our way of life!)

So, why is the message not resonating?

Perhaps this following article articulates this very point a little bit better than I ever could:

‘At this point in the discussion, the copyright industry will complain that they only take action for the illegal bitpatterns found, and that there is no infraction on the right to legal communications. And in doing so, they put themselves in the exact same spot as the old East German Stasi, which also steamed open all letters sent in the mail – but only took action on those with illegal content, just like the copyright industry describes as their preferred scenario. Stasi, too, sorted legal from illegal, and left the legal alone.’

And that is exactly what the copyright industry is demanding:  decrypt and check all the communication, permit the legal bits through and hand the rest over to law-enforcement agencies!

Please, consider the following court ruling in the UK:  All UK ISPs are now compelled to block access to Pirate Bay.

Please, c

onsider what is necessary to accomplish this:  each and every bit of communication has to be decrypted, analyzed and then either permitted to pass through or not.

That means that a private company not only has the right – it is compelled to – read each and every single email everyone sends.

What do they do with the information they receive in this manner?  The ruling does not bother itself with such mundane details….


Sorry – please, insert the worst invectives of your choice here….

Because in a very real sense, this does indeed mean the end of private speech on the internet and the end of anonymous speech on the internet.

And let’s not forget our not-so-distant history:  anonymous speach is the cornerstone of liberty!

Without anonymous speach, there would be no Federalist Papers.

Without anonymous speach, there would be no way to overthrow tyrants.

No wonder those who want to hold power will use any pretext that presents itself in order to eliminate private communication and anonymous speech!!!

The future of broadband in Canada: have a voice!

Tim Denton, the CRTC commissioner, has recently made the following statement:

‘The rights of Canadians to talk and communicate across the Internet are vastly too important to be subjected to a scheme of government licensing. If more Canadians were aware how close their communications have come to being regulated by this Commission, not by our will but because we administer an obsolete statute, they would be rightly concerned. Fortunately, good sense prevailed and the evidence for intervention was not yet present. But this confluence of facts may not always be there. Thus the call for a government review of a digital transition strategy is both wise and opportune. Let us fix this problem.’

via Michael Geist

And while I do not believe that the CRTC has the right to control our wavelengths, the reality is that they do.  And, to their credit, they have (as Michael Geist’s post puts it so eloquently), decided to keep their hands off the internet – for now.

But, they will go on to develop a new comprehensive national digital strategy…

All of our voices should be heard, to help ensure that the net truly remains neutral – or, at least as neutral as possible.  This is important:  still, most of us are not sure how to best be heard…

Which is why I am going to quote the following text from Campaign for Democratic Media almost in its entirety:

Citizens from coast to coast are expected to engage in Canada’s first-ever online LIVE video-streamed national conversation about the future of broadband in this country.

During Town Hall meetings in Toronto, Ottawa and Vancouver, viewers can take part in the confab through live, real-time online chat available at theREALnews.com, rabble.ca, TheTyee, Beyond Robson, SaveOurNet.ca and other participating websites.

The first of these innovative town hall meetings takes place in Toronto on Monday, June 8. The participating websites will start streaming video at 7:30 p.m.

The town hall events will bring together web innovators, entrepreneurs, social change leaders, cultural workers and citizens to discuss the future of the Internet in Canada. The sessions will be recorded and will form part of the citizen testimony that SaveOurNet.ca’s Steve Anderson will use to guide his presentation to the CRTC at the July 6 traffic management hearing.

SaveOurNet.ca is encouraging people who live within commuting distance to attend the town hall sessions to meet and mingle with fellow Netizens who want a say in Canada’s future Internet.

Here are the details, along with some updated information:

TORONTO • June 8 • 7 p.m.
The Gladstone Hotel, 1214 Queen St. West

Speakers include:
Mark Surman, Executive Director, Mozilla Foundation
Olivia Chow, NDP Member of Parliament
Steve Anderson, co-founder, SaveOurNet.ca
Rocky Gaudrault, CEO, Teksavvy Solutions Inc.
Derek Blackadder, National Representative with CUPE

Special guests:
Jesse Brown, Search Engine
David Skinner, Communications Professor, York University
Kim Elliot, Rabble.ca
Mark Kuznicki, remarkk consultant
Dan O’Brien, ACTRA
Ben Lewis, Canadian Federation of Students
Wayne Mcphail, w8nc

REGISTER TO RESERVE A SEAT: http://saveournet.ca/toronto

OTTAWA • June 10 • 7 p.m.
Ottawa Public Library Main Branch, 120 Metcalfe St.

Speakers include:
Michael Geist, Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law, University of Ottawa, blogger
Charlie Angus, NDP MP, Heritage and Culture critic
Rocky Gaudrault, CEO, Teksavvy Solutions Inc.
Bill St. Arnaud, Chief Research Officer for CANARIE Inc.

Introduction by Steve Anderson, co-founder, SaveOurNet.ca
Discussion Facilitator: Marita Moll, TeleCommunities Canada

Special guests:
Mike Gifford, founder of Open Concept Consulting Inc. Leslie Regan Shade, Communications Professor, Concordia University Graham Cox, Canadian Federation of Students

REGISTER TO RESERVE A SEAT: http://saveournet.ca/ottawa

VANCOUVER • June 20 • (time to be determined)
Vancouver ChangeCamp, BCIT, downtown campus, 555 Seymour St.

Speakers include:
Rocky Gaudrault, CEO, Teksavvy Solutions Inc.
Steve Anderson, co-founder, SaveOurNet.ca
(More to come)

REGISTER TO RESERVE A SEAT: http://vanchangecamp.eventbrite.com/

Canada’s FIRST live INTERNET DANCE PARTY will hit Vancouver on Saturday, June 20! This is a fundraiser for host SaveOurNet.ca as well as the official after party for VanChangeCamp.

6 to 8 p.m. – Social & Film Screening
8 p.m. to 2 a.m. – Internet Dance Party
Gallery Gachet

Special Guests:
Quest Poetics feat: Mello Black, Mario Vaira, & DJ Hayze
More guests to be announced soon!

RESERVE A SPOT: http://internetdanceparty.eventbrite.com/

Join the Facebook group of your local Town Hall:

Organizing these events would not be possible without your contributions. Please donate today:

If you received this message from a friend, you can sign up for Campaign for Democratic Media.