Author Net Neutrality User Forum
9 volunteers’ co-writing & illustrating and lots of people’s review in Forum
Co-author
Summerz (summerz@gmail.com)
Blogger
Co-founder
of “ournet.kr”
Member
of “slownews.kr”
CEO
of Koinlab Inc.
Minoci (skymap21@gmail.com)
Blogger
(www.minoci.net)
Co-founder
of “ournet.kr”
Member
of “slownews.kr”
KANG, Jeong-Soo (berlinlog@gmail.com )
Ph.D.
Researcher,
Communication Research Institute of Yonsei - University
Blogger
(www.berlinlog.com)
Jang, HyeYeong(superrabbit@me.com)
Multi-media Artist, Internet Activist
Park Lee, Se-Yoon
Visual Artist, Internet Activist, Member of “slownews.kr”
Kim, Borami (squ24n@gmail.com)
Attorney
of Law, a Member of the Korean Bar Association,
Adjunct
Professor, Korea University Law School
CHUN, Eung-Hwi (ehchun@gmail.com)
Executive
Director, The Green Consumer’s Network, Chairperson of
OpenNet
Consumer
Activist
KANG, Jang-Mook (mooknc@gmail.com or redsea@dongguk.ac.kr)
Ph.D.
Professor,
Electronic Commerce Research Institute of Dongguk University
CTO,
Korea Institute for Evaluation in Technology and Management
OH, Kil-Young (eclaw@hanmail.net)
Ph. Jur.
Professor, Dept. of Police Administration, Shingyeong University
Table of Contents and Abstract
Introduction
Net Neutrality User Forum Introduction p.8
Co-author Introduction p.18
Recommendation by Chun, Kilnam p.22
Prepace by Jang, Hyeyoung p. 26
Cartoons “Mango” (Mango means a cat to guard the network, the symbol of Net Neutrality User Forum) by Park Lee, Se-Yoon p.36
End Users Raise Issues
Telecom Companies and Their Gangs (Summerz) p.48
Many people don't know what net neutrality is and why it is so important. People even don't care about it because it seems that net neutrality is simply a matter between wireless telecommunications companies and some content providers. Furthermore, it looks so difficult to understand. In fact, it's not. It's so easy to comprehend what net neutrality means if you see the ex parte history of Korean wireless communication, which was written by the strong bond between wireless telecommuncation companies, newspapers and the regulator.
We
Are the 'End-user': Internet Governance from the Perspective of Net
Neutrality User Forum (Minoci) p. 68
The
issue of Net neutrality is the battle between those who have the
network - internet service providers, ISP - and those who have not -
end-users. We are all end-users, while ISPs are very few. The few are
trying to control all. The government should act as a reasonable
moderator, but it does not. Even it supports the ISPs. This is
completely wrong. As modern democratic states recognize the
sovereignty of their people, the rights of the end-users must be
exercised on the Internet. The Net Neutrality User Forum is
established for that. And this is the Internet governance. Power to
the End-User!
Net
Neutrality from Economics Perspective
Pricing structure and Transparency on Wireless Internet Network Market (Kang, Jeongsoo ) p.96
Achieving
social consensus and economic rules of the Internet is the first
step
to ensure innovation and sustainable development of the Internet.
This
article
examines economic aspects of net neutrality in the context of a
two-sided
markets model and the rent-seeking theory.
Net Neutrality from Regulation Perspective
Problems on Korean Net Neutrality Debates (Kim, Borami) p. 120
One of the biggest problems with the net neutrality issue in Korea is that telecom companies and the regulators (Korean Communications Commission, KCC) have argued that they don’t have to disclose any information related to policy decision-making processes until recently. To examine these problems, we first review the basic technological principles of the Internet and the current situations in the US and the EU regarding net neutrality, and then analyze the problems with the laws currently in force in Korea: the Korean Telecommunications Business Act. The Korean Telecommunications Business Act prescribes the "principle of no unreasonable blocking and no unreasonable discrimination" to be able to be applied to the net neutrality issue. Given the situation in Korea where broadband carriers are classified as common carriers, and the fact that Korea’s telecommunication industry is oligopolistic, application of ex-ante regulation based on the Telecommunications Business Act is a necessity. But KCC declared that the settlement of the net neutrality issue should be left to the market. The "Net Neutrality User Forum(NN User Forum)" have asked KCC several times to allow them to participate in the policy decision-making process and to provide related information. However, KCC denied the requests saying that it didn’t keep any records of the advisory meetings which have been held as many as 38 times. Moreover, KCC released controversial "traffic management policy" documents in hard-copy form ,deliberately, to make it difficult to spread. So NN User Forum had to convert the hard-copy documents into digital documents by typing and posting them to our blog: nnforum.kr. As soon as the KCC discovered the documents online, an official from KCC ordered not to disclose the documents and to delete the posting. NN User Forum have emphasized that the KCC should be open and transparent. It is a very important factor regarding the net neutrality issue.
The Evolution of Internet Ecology & The Issue of Internet Interconnection in Korea: In the Context of Net Neutrality Policy Discussion (Chun, Eung-Hwi) p.156
How
to sort out the problem of the explosive increase in data traffic on
the internet network depends on which pattern of internet
interconnection and financial settlements could be adopted. However,
due to this phenomenon of data traffic increase, network enterprises
are trying to justify the necessity of network traffic management and
moving away from the principle of net neutrality. Moreover, in Korea,
internet connectivity service providers with their own backbone
network have been classified as common carriers which need to be
regulated by governmental authorities since 2004. Accordingly, the
structure of internet interconnection has also been formed by the
government on the basis of government rules for interconnection
because interconnection was a duty of common carriers, although there
was already a neutral internet exchange service initiated by a public
organization beforehand. Consequently, internet backbone markets,
including internet exchange and internet connectivity service markets
of ISPs, and even the server farm market, have been monopolized and
vertically integrated by three large incumbent backbone providers.
Due to these reasons, even though content or application providers
have sufficed the demands of end users, those ISPs which retained the
major content or application providers including so-called search
service or portal service companies, could not get the status of
peering with large-size backbone networks. Still most content and
application service providers are paying off part of the transit fees
of their ISPs depending on their occupied bandwidth of the leased
lines. And mostly, the ISPs are also backbone providers and their
server farms are usually these ISPs’ affiliated companies.
Naturally most of the costs have maintained the level of monopoly
pricing. Nevertheless, recently, those network entrepreneurs are
arguing the need for a price rise on the pretext of data traffic
increase. But, in the cases of other countries with an unregulated
market competition environment, those patterns of internet
connectivity have changed into “partial transit” and/or “paid
peering” as data traffic has increased. And even in such
conditions, the additional pricing of “paid peering” has never
been beyond the level of transit fee in a competitive market.
Therefore, despite the increase in data traffic, a transit fee rise
or artificial network management can not be justified even in
distorted market conditions formed by governmental regulation.
Rather, natural evolution of internet connectivity pattern and the
introduction of a new financial settlement mechanism should be
sought.
Net Neutrality from the Perspective of Privacy
Technological debates on Net Neutrality and DPI (Kang, Jangmook) p. 194
I
deal with the threat of invasion of privacy which is caused by DPI
(Deep Packet Inspection, also called complete packet inspection and
Information extraction) in this chapter.
Especially
I focus on why the Internet is damaged by this specific function - or
service - of DPI based on technologies, i.e. scan port, stateful
packet tool, packet loss or drop, packet delay, Ethernet sniffer or
wireless sniffer, protocol analyzer or packet sniffer, etc.). As the
Internet has been included in other communication services such as
IP-TV, broadcasting, mVoIP, cable TV, telephone, and radio, the
Internet monitoring technology is easily abused to surveille
citizen’s private life. This chapter is all about how the feature
and the fundamental of that technology are contrary to the freedom of
the Internet at its beginning, why we should keep internet
neutrality, and how important DPI Policy of Privacy is.
On the Illegality of DPI in the Net Neutrality Context (Oh, Kil-Young) p.224
DPI(Deep Packet Inspection) issue has mainly been considered as a matter of packet-wiretapping so far. That is why it might seem to be slightly unusual to connect DPI and net neutrality issue together. However, these days DPI is not just a simple technical issue since DPI have variously been adjusted and adopted for several purposes to abuse network. Now where massive network abuse and violence appear it is easy to find DPI related issues. Net neutrality violation is no exception either. DPI explicitly shows its indiscriminate and violent nature related to the issue. This chapter consists of two parts: First, the seriousness of DPI issue is discussed with some illustrations and metaphors. And then technical explanation of DPI and legal interpretation follow. The last part analizes how DPI actually violates the principles of the internet and the constitutional order.
Questions Left
Cartoon : Net Neutrality Love Story by Jang, Hyeyoung p.252
Index p.264
Terminology p. 272
'english' 카테고리의 다른 글
| <Speaking of Net Neutrality> Book Information (0) | 2013.09.16 |
|---|---|
| NNUF Actions - etc (0) | 2013.09.16 |
| NNUF Actions - Press Release (0) | 2013.09.16 |
| NNUF Actions - Action (0) | 2013.09.16 |
| NNUF Actions - Lecture and Seminar (0) | 2013.09.16 |
| NNUF Actions - Forum (0) | 2013.09.16 |
