 |
 | 
RadioDoc
Sortofadog
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
Chicago, IL | Re: Why dont we have laws against this? We don't have laws against this because law firms make huge amounts of money running these operations.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
|
| | bigjimc
join:2003-04-21
Middleboro, MA
 ·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Why dont we have laws against this? We don;t have laws against it because of the Constitution of the United States gives all of us the unalienable rights to our opinions.
Notice.."opinions". No matter how much I HATE their opinion. Thankfully there are others exposing these paid opinions.
--
Just my 2 cents...Flame Lightly... | |
|
| | | 
nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
 ·Cox HSI
 ·Speakeasy
| Re: Why dont we have laws against this? said by bigjimc  :We don;t have laws against it because of the Constitution of the United States gives all of us the unalienable rights to our opinions. Notice.."opinions". No matter how much I HATE their opinion. Thankfully there are others exposing these paid opinions. Opinions are one thing. Deception is another. If AT&T needs to express an opinion, they should do so. Hiding behind a "grass roots" campaign of "real citizens" smacks of deception.
-tom
--
"Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficial. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding." -Louis D Brandeis | |
|
| | | Stumbles
join:2002-12-17
Port Saint Lucie, FL
| Well yeah, opinions are fine and there is nothing wrong with an individual or company stating one.
BUT... when an individual or company hides behind and organization, funds said organization AND leads everyone to believe the organization is one thing BUT is in FACT simply a front.... then that is nothing short of DECEPTION. misleading and LYING.
And who says there is no such thing as conspiracy theories. | |
|
| | | |
| | | | 
richardpor
Fur it up
join:2003-04-19
Portland, OR
| Re: Why dont we have laws against this? said by owenhome :The Constitution makes no reference to free speech for corporations, only individuals. Besides, if he's being paid for it, it's hardly "free speech". Seems to me it's about as free as he is and I'll bet his salary is pretty steep. Deceptive trade practices are illegal and this borders DAMN CLOSE to that. Will any thing be done about it? Not in this country. At least, not as long as these companies keep funneling cash into the mouths of our noble officials. It's just another way to lobby. A damned despicable one, but that's all it is. Again, welcome to the USA Inc. I recalled that corporations are made of individuals. There is no difference between corporation or individuals when it comes to our freedoms granted in constitution. | |
|
| | | | | bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
 ·Packet8
·Cox HSI
| Re: Why dont we have laws against this? said by richardpor :I recalled that corporations are made of individuals. There is no difference between corporation or individuals when it comes to our freedoms granted in constitution. Then the Constitution applies to the individuals within the corporation, not the corporation itself.
--
"Extremes to the right and left of any political dispute are always wrong."
—Dwight Eisenhower | |
|
| | | | | | backness
join:2005-07-08
K2P OW2 | Re: Why dont we have laws against this? corporations are considered individuals | |
|
| | | | | | | bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus | Re: Why dont we have laws against this? While they have been recognized as legal persons, they were not always granted the same rights as coporeal persons.
--
"Extremes to the right and left of any political dispute are always wrong."
—Dwight Eisenhower | |
|
| | | | | | | | backness
join:2005-07-08
K2P OW2 | Re: Why dont we have laws against this? ok i agree now
 | |
|
| bigjimc
join:2003-04-21
Middleboro, MA
·Verizon FIOS
| Absolutely. I think that AT&T is deceptively spending the stock holders money. There should be a regulation that states that any company spending stockholders money on paid opinion should notify us.
This regulation should treat these opinions similar to a political advertisement (as they are).
I agree that this deception is wrong.
*The preceding was not a paid advertisement by anyone*
--
Just my 2 cents...Flame Lightly... | |
|
TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs: | Like net neutrality proponents don't do the same Check out who contributes to »www.savetheinternet.com/ .
Some real astroturfing going on by the contributors to this organization. | |
|
| 
vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA
edit:
August 10th, @02:49PM
| Re: Like net neutrality proponents don't do the same Wow, the Parent's Television Council... I would have thought they would equate net neutrality with pornography and come out against.
Seriously, though, what's questionable about their contributors? | |
|
| | 
rit56
join:2000-12-01
New York, NY | Re: Like net neutrality proponents don't do the same tkjunkmail is an industry shill. | |
|
| | | 
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
·Packet8
| Re: Like net neutrality proponents don't do the same said by rit56 :tkjunkmail is an industry shill. That's correct actually - he's from the other side, from the cable industry, the enemy of the telcos.
It's pretty funny to look up his older posts WRT cable-related lobbying... | |
|
| | | | grandpinaple
join:2006-01-03
New York, NY | Re: Like net neutrality proponents don't do the same Glad to see the trolls still hang arround these threads. I'm pretty sure Tk isn't a cable shill considering many of his pro telco posts. | |
|
| | | | |
rit56
join:2000-12-01
New York, NY | Re: Like net neutrality proponents don't do the same apples and oranges. tkjunkmail is pro cable/telco, anti consumer/middle class typical bbr user. | |
|
| | | | | | 
asdfdfdf
@xtraport.net | Re: Like net neutrality proponents don't do the same Come on guys,. give Tkjunkmail a break.
I often disagree with him but he is a true believer, not a shill. It isn't right to try to blur the distinction. | |
|
| nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| said by TK Junk Mail :Check out who contributes to » www.savetheinternet.com/ . Some real astroturfing going on by the contributors to this organization. you mean some grassrooting, don't you?
The industry group, "hands off the internet", certainly meets the definition of astroturfing, but "save the internet" actually IS a grass roots group.
With few exceptions, "hands off" is telecom companies, telecom orgs or telecom lobbying/front groups; "save" includes public groups, churches, companies, individuals, unions, etc. - looks grass roots to me. | |
|
| 
braynes
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Waterville, ME | "Seriously, though, what's questionable about their contributors?"
Yes I would like to know which one offended you or who are you elude to?
Bruce | |
|
| |
TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast
| Re: Like net neutrality proponents don't do the same said by braynes :"Seriously, though, what's questionable about their contributors?" Yes I would like to know which one offended you or who are you elude to? Bruce SavetheInternet principles:
No corporation or political party is funding our efforts.
Now lets look at some of the contributors:
ACLU of Iowa & American Civil Liberties Union - heavily funded by Democratic contributors
Common Cause - Link to controlling board. Notice all the media members and content providers on the board.
»www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?···b=203884
Democrats.com »www.democrats.com/
Moveon.org Paid for by MoveOn.org Political Action. Funded by George Soros and his investment empire.
»www.moveon.org/about.html
Reclaim the media - dominated by content providers and political operatives
»reclaimthemedia.org/about_rtm
And more and more. »www.savetheinternet.com/=members I don't feel like going site by site and spending hours digging out the real behind the scenes funding for every name in the list. Feel free if you want to.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
My Web Page | |
|
| | | nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| Re: Like net neutrality proponents don't do the same said by TK Junk Mail :SavetheInternet principles:
No corporation or political party is funding our efforts.
uhhh, I think they mean like, Democratic or Republican. I didn't notice any elected officials on that list.
those connections you have pointed out are correct, but if we looked at the connections on the other side I think we all know what the results would be.
It's a fact that support or opposition of this issue can be divided on ideological, political grounds:
Democrats: pro-consumer, pro-competition (because it's good for customers)
Republicans: pro-business, anti-competition (because business doesn't like it)
the grassroots is fighting fire with fire | |
|
| | |
asdfdfdf
@xtraport.net
| What makes an astroturf organization isn't the existence of some political ties or contributors. If that was the standard, all groups would be tainted and the term would be meaningless. Astroturf groups are for hire PR firms that shield their paid PR campaign behind front groups, designed to look like a grass roots development, rather than a paid PR campaign.
Save the internet is a cluster of groups who came together because they share a common agenda on net neutrality, not because they were hired to do so and not because they were trying to create a front group for funneling lobbying money or trying to mislead the public about their origins.
If we found out that save the internet was created by a PR firm, hired by google and yahoo, who then put together this coalition listing to hide the fact that this was paid PR for google, I would agree with you.
The indications are that this is NOT how save the internet came about.
I wish you could see that trying to blur these distinctions isn't in anyone's long term interest, just as I wish the people who treat you unjustly, on these forums, could understand they aren't doing any of us any favors.
Everyone has this nihilistic tendency to blow confused smoke everywhere. It's a deadly contagion that won't leave anything standing. | |
|
| broadbander
join:2005-07-21
Brooklyn, NY | I assumed he was being sarcastic ... | |
|
| |
ftthz
If love can kill hate can also save
join:2005-10-17 | they do it because they can reminds of the viral video that exxon made making fun of Al Gore's movie ... they got the money to blow to on things like this... | |
|
nickb
Still Waiting For My Flashcom Rebates
join:1999-07-10
Brooklyn, NY
| What the hell do you expect? This is a high stakes game being played here by high rollers. They WILL use all and every quasi-legal tactic.
Thanks heavens it is possible for reports like this one to be written and distributed.
In other parts of the world exposing this kind of thing leads to a knock on the door in the middle of the night, or worse.
--
I'm a cynic and I've approved this message. | |
|
kaila
join:2000-10-11
Lincolnshire, IL
clubs: | $20k per day......hmmmm Who besides the golo's (elected government officials and lobbyists) are the beneficiaries of this cash. And how can one get in on this telco money train? | |
|
|
vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA
·Comcast
| Re: $20k per day......hmmmm said by kaila :Who besides the golo's (elected government officials and lobbyists) are the beneficiaries of this cash. And how can one get in on this telco money train? Most likely anyone who sells ads. | |
|
| garywk
join:2001-03-06
Clarkston, WA
·CableOne
| said by kaila :Who besides the golo's (elected government officials and lobbyists) are the beneficiaries of this cash. And how can one get in on this telco money train? I wouldn't doubt at all that the telco's and other companies contributing to this are not paying shills to come sites such as dslreports to defend their actions and promote their agenda. They are spending millions on this, and covering all their bases, as they see billions of dollars of revenue at stake for them.
--
“A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both.”
Dwight David Eisenhower | |
|
|
RadioDoc
Sortofadog
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
Chicago, IL | Join a DC law firm. | |
|
|
| |
| 
tschmidt
Premium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
·Verizon Online DSL
| Net Neutrality is much bigger issue then service tiers It is interesting the article focuses on tiers - to my mind that really is not what this debate is about.
If an ISP wants to create tiered services and the Service Level Agreement (SLA) to go with them - that is fine with me. For example if an ISP creates a SLA that states xx% of a customer’s traffic will be handled as high priority and able to traverse the ISP network will be less then xxms that is a useful value add service. Customer’s that need it and are willing to pay extra sign up.
A hard-core gamer or VoIP user may want to pay extra to reduce latency. The key point is the customer gets to decide if they want this value add service and the customer gets to mark which packets get high priority.
That is not my understanding of what the large first-mile access providers have in mind. They want to enter into business agreement with select content providers. Those willing to pay get express service; everything else goes in the slow lane. So for example if Google has a relationship with Verizon – they get preferential treatment while Yahoo, AltaVista, etc get the slow lane. The ISP gets to decide the winners and losers.
That is bad for customers and bad for innovation.
/Tom
| |
|
| | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Net Neutrality is much bigger issue then service tiers said by tschmidt :A hard-core gamer or VoIP user may want to pay extra to reduce latency. The key point is the customer gets to decide if they want this value add service and the customer gets to mark which packets get high priority. ISPs don't guarantee any speed or latency as it is now even if you do pay a higher price.
My guess is that they are looking for additional revenue streams and they realize that consumers are at the end of their ropes and won't pay more without many looking for alternatives or cancelling. | |
|
kdepasquale
join:2004-03-13
Livermore, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| I know it's unrealistic, but... I know it's unrealistic, but it's too bad that the telcos and cable companies don't spend this $20,000 a day upgrading their infrastructure. Maybe ATT could even follow in verizon's footsteps w/ fibre - even if it's just in the major cities like SF, LA, San Jose, etc. It would make a world of difference. Or maybe they even could spend the money so that their jobs wouldn't be outsourced. Oh well. Like I said, it is an unrealistic expectation, no matter how logical it is. | |
|
batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ
clubs:
·Verizon Online DSL
| Money well spent. The Phone Company used to spend money on things like Bell Labs. Bell Labs was the premiere pure research facility in the US of A. Among the tens of thousands of patents granted to Bell Labs were two for the transistor and the laser. All patents granted to Bell Labs had to be released to the public domain because of AT&T's regulated status.
I for one think America would be better off with The Phone Company spending money on world changing inventions then lobbying. | |
|
| 
mr sean
Professional Infidel
Premium,ExMod 2001-07
join:2001-04-03
N. Absentia
clubs:
| Re: Money well spent. said by batterup :I for one think America would be better off with The Phone Company spending money on world changing inventions then lobbying. I could agree with that except for one small word: "THE".
--
How you can make the world a Better Place | |
|
| |
batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ
clubs:
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Money well spent. said by mr sean :said by batterup :I for one think America would be better off with The Phone Company spending money on world changing inventions then lobbying. I could agree with that except for one small word: "THE". Give it another five years, resistance is futile, prepare to be assimilated. | |
|
| | |
mr sean
Professional Infidel
Premium,ExMod 2001-07
join:2001-04-03
N. Absentia
clubs:
edit:
August 10th, @09:25PM
| Re: Money well spent. ~sigh~
Okay.
I'll cave in if THE Phone Company hands out cute fuzzy puppets like Karl Bode puts in the headline...
--
How you can make the world a Better Place | |
|
sayitaintso
@verizon.net | taxing youtube.. but how will youtube send all that copyright violation data across the internet? over toll roads?!?
HAhahaha! Yar! | |
|
viperpa33s
Why Me?
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Bradenton, FL
·Bright House
| Tell the truth, not distort it I don't understand why the Telco's have to distort the truth to get there message out. If they believe there policy of being against net neutrality is on sound grounding, then what do they have to worry about.
Being against net neutrality is not about creating new services and giving people what they want. It's all about making money. Right now new services won't be created unless the Telco makes money, so how would it be any different after net neutrality? | |
|
Techman21
join:2005-04-14
Richmond, VA
| ...its a series of tubes Well I need my tubes to be cleaned. They're getting clogged with all this spam so my e-mail comes in slower.
And we should have .xxx so all the porn isn't readily available for the young folks.
Its not like Movie Gallery displays porn movies right along side other movies in totally different genres as it is. (If you didn't know Movie Gallery does do this. I noticed this a while back when I used to rent movies all the time...no not porn.)
Seriously though, who the hell votes for these dumb ass reps?
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Series_of_tubes
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Stevens | |
|
batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ
clubs:
·Verizon Online DSL
| Technology organization " The editorials simply identify McCurry as "co-chair of Hands Off the Internet, a Washington, D.C.-based coalition of technology, media and nonprofit organizations."
Last time I looked at&t was a technology organization.
I love the pink sock puppet by-the-way. | |
|
|
|
|
Telcos Continuing Fake Consumer Group Campaigns
