Principi e fini. Strategia della confusione in Europa sulla neutralità della rete

I commenti di oggi sulle decisioni del Parlamento europeo in merito alla neutralità della rete sono molto divergenti. Il vice presidente della Commissione, Andrus Ansip, uno che teoricamente ci capisce, è molto soddisfatto. Tim Berners-Lee, uno che ci capisce di sicuro teoricamente e praticamente, è molto preoccupato. La lista dei critici è lunghissima: Barbara van Schewick, Edri, Quadrature du net, Marietje Schaake e così via. Notizie: BBC, Techcrunch, Businessinsider, The Verge, e così via.

Ansip dopo il voto di oggi:
“The voice of Europeans has been heard. Today’s vote is the final result of intense efforts to put an end to roaming charges in the European Union and to safeguard the open internet. As from mid-June 2017, Europeans will pay the same price to use their mobile devices when travelling in the EU as they do at home. And they will already pay less as from April 2016. This is the culmination of hard work by the Commission, and in particular by former Vice-Presidents Viviane Reding and Neelie Kroes, to tackle high roaming charges. This is not only about money; this is about bringing down barriers in the Digital Single Market. Today’s achievement is a first step towards a Telecoms Single Market. More work will need to be done to overcome national silos and address challenges such as spectrum coordination. We will go further as early as next year with an ambitious overhaul of EU telecoms rules. We count on the support of the European Parliament and Member States to make this happen”.

Berners-Lee prima del rigetto degli emendamenti:
To strengthen and clarify the proposed EU net neutrality rules, here are the amendments that MEPs should insist on:
– The current proposal allows ISPs to create fast lanes for companies that pay to have their content load faster by calling them “specialized services”. Fast lanes will make it harder for anyone who can’t pay extra fees — start-ups, small businesses, artists, activists, and educators in Europe and around the globe — to reach Europeans online. MEPs should vote for the amendments that close the so-called “specialized services” loophole to prevent the creation of online fast lanes and keep the Internet a level playing field.
– The current proposal permits ISPs to exempt applications from users’ monthly bandwidth cap (“zero-rating”). Economic discrimination is just as harmful as technical discrimination, so ISPs will still be able to pick winners and losers online. MEPs should adopt the amendments that allow member states to create their own rules regulating the harmful practice of zero-rating. That way, States which have already banned this practice will be able to continue to do so, while others can move to protect innovation if they choose.
– The proposal allows ISPs to define classes of services, and speed up or slow down traffic in those classes, even in the absence of congestion. As well as harming competition, this also discourages encryption: many ISPs lump all encrypted services together in a single class, and throttle that class. MEPs should vote for the amendments that ban class-based discrimination to protect users, competition, privacy, and innovation online.
– The proposal allows ISPs to prevent “impending” congestion. That means that ISPs can slow down traffic anytime, arguing that congestion was just about to happen. MEPs should vote to close this loophole.
If adopted as currently written, these rules will threaten innovation, free speech and privacy, and compromise Europe’s ability to lead in the digital economy.

I principi della net neutrality sono affermati dall’Europa. Ma la decisione di oggi lascia aperte molte porte all’interpretazione soggettiva da parte degli operatori telefonici in materia di neutralità della rete. Troppe porte. Prioritizzazione, management del traffico e soprattutto zero rating. Quelli che vorranno rovinare la libertà di innovare introducendo le loro forme di discriminazione commerciale e non solo nella circolazione delle informazioni in rete potranno farlo e sarà una lunga e dispendiosa battaglia dimostrare che non sono coerenti i principi della neutralità della rete. La strategia della confusione ha prevalso sulla chiarezza.