網路中立性 Net Neutrality
編輯歷史
| 時間 | 作者 | 版本 |
|---|---|---|
| 2014-04-20 09:39 – 09:39 | r8691 – r8693 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-04-19 17:53 – 18:26 | r7832 – r8690 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-04-19 05:31 – 05:32 | r7826 – r7831 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-04-19 01:34 – 03:03 | r7447 – r7825 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-04-11 14:49 – 14:49 | r7445 – r7446 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-02-23 14:34 – 14:34 | r7440 – r7444 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-02-22 01:26 – 01:56 | r7426 – r7439 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-02-11 08:01 – 08:51 | r7027 – r7425 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-02-11 03:51 – 04:30 | r6764 – r7026 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-02-03 07:55 – 07:55 | r6743 – r6763 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-02-02 12:01 – 12:14 | r6668 – r6742 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-02-02 10:18 – 10:22 | r6590 – r6667 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-01-27 10:04 – 10:23 | r6394 – r6589 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-01-27 00:17 – 01:42 | r5749 – r6393 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-01-21 08:41 – 09:55 | r5400 – r5748 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-01-19 00:33 – 00:34 | r5397 – r5399 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-01-18 16:58 – 17:55 | r5360 – r5396 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-01-18 12:02 – 12:05 | r5349 – r5359 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-01-18 09:11 – 09:58 | r4893 – r5348 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-01-18 05:15 – 05:15 | r4891 – r4892 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-01-18 04:50 | r4890 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-01-13 07:38 – 07:49 | r4868 – r4889 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-01-13 02:54 – 02:54 | r4864 – r4867 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-01-10 11:17 – 14:22 | r4128 – r4863 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-01-10 05:57 – 07:21 | r3608 – r4127 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-01-10 03:31 – 03:34 | r3581 – r3607 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-01-09 15:34 – 15:34 | r3569 – r3580 | |
顯示 diff（diff 過大，略過）
|
||
| 2014-01-09 04:00 – 04:00 | r3567 – r3568 | |
顯示 diff（55 行未修改）
- *“若允許寬頻運營商能夠控制線上民眾的閱讀與活動，會讓網際網路獲得成功的大原則，從根本上被破壞” - Vint Cerf , 網際網路之父
+ *“若允許寬頻運營商能夠控制線上民眾的閱讀與活動，會讓網際網路獲得成功的基本原則，從根本上被破壞” - Vint Cerf , 網際網路之父
What is Net Neutrality?
FREEDOM OF communication IN THE DIGITAL ERA
（569 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-09 02:33 – 02:34 | r3544 – r3566 | |
顯示 diff（33 行未修改）
*Design by: CtrlSPATIE
*European Digital Rights (EDRi) is an association of 35 privacy and digital civil rights associations from 21 Countries.
+
+ *插播：維基百科條目翻譯：from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality to http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/網路中立性
+
*網路中立性 NET NEUTRALITY
（589 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-08 16:28 – 16:48 | r3529 – r3543 | |
顯示 diff（490 行未修改）
c rtain applications by its mobile Internet
customers 21.
- One year later, on 8 May 2012, the
+ One
+
+ 2011年時，之前獨佔荷蘭電信市場的業者KPN宣布計畫，將要求消費者另外支付某些第三方應用程式，例如WhatsApp以及Skype，所使用的數據費用。這些計畫，都是為了要為KPN本身的服務，包括手機通話及簡訊，創造競爭優勢。2011年五月，KPN還揭露該公司使用深層封包檢測（DPI，見第九頁的說明圖表）技術，辨識行動網路消費者所使用的某些應用程式。
+ year later, on 8 May 2012, the
N therlands adopted crucial legislation to
s feguard the open and secure Internet,
（9 行未修改）
c mpanies, while ensuring freedom of
e pression and privacy on the Internet.
- The law aims to maximise choice and
+ The
+
+ 一年之後，2012年五月八日，荷蘭通過確保網路開放及安全的重要立法，包括網路中立條款。荷蘭也因此成為歐洲第一個，世界第二個在法律上賦予網路中立原則神聖地位的國家。這也顯示了，起草網路中立立法時，一併考慮網路使用者、服務提供者與電信公司的利益，同時又兼顧網路隱私及言論自由，是可行之事。
+ law aims to maximise choice and
f eedom of expression on the Internet.
I therefore prohibits the hindering or
（9 行未修改）
o Human Rights.
- Pages 20~21
+ P
+
+ 這項法律的目標，是要盡可能維護網路上的言論自由以及選擇。因此，該法禁止阻礙或中斷網路上的服務或應用程式。只有在某些有限的情況下，當有必要阻礙或中斷服務時，網路中立原則才允許例外。這些例外必須以狹隘的角度詮釋，且評估是否必要時，需基於比例原則，而且必須使用在歐洲人權公約的脈絡之下所建立的比例原則。
+ ages 20~21
*以下為原第20~21頁內容，認領人：
TWeipinghe first exception aims to ensure that in case of congestion, time-sensitive traffic (such as VoIP) can be prioritised, and that in such cases other traffic may be delayed. Providers should avoid congestion in the first place by adequate investment in capacity. However, if there is congestion, then the measures under this exemption are designed to facilitate end-users’ ability to continue to have maximum access to information, disseminate information
（5 行未修改）
“As much as anything else, the economic success of the Internet comes from its architecture.”
- - Lawrence Lessig, Harvard Law School Professor 23safeguard Net Neutrality
+ - Lawrence Lessig, Harvard Law School Professor 23safeguard Net Neutrality
*Glossary ()/2
P
（84 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-08 14:54 – 14:54 | r3523 – r3528 | |
顯示 diff 網路中立性 Net Neutrality
*此為共筆翻譯網路中立性文件的工作頁面，校稿完成後將公佈於相關專頁／網站，有興趣參與的各位，請自行於認領人填上暱稱／ID，並直接於原文上方進行翻譯即可。（為使共筆翻譯順利進行，圖片部分已經先處理完成）
- *也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy, WeiHung, 白凜希
+ *也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy, WeiHung, 白凜希, Weiping
*可以協助校訂的請在此簽名：nchild、
（612 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-08 13:47 – 14:18 | r3275 – r3522 | |
顯示 diff（45 行未修改）
In this booklet, we will explain Net Neutrality, why it is important, why certain Internet access providers believe that they have an interest in violating it, and we will address common misconceptions
- (XXX) 網路中立性原則是指: 網路上的每一個節點都可以連接到網路上的任何其他點，不會因為來源的地或者數據類型的歧而受到。
- 這此是核是網路的成。網的核心原因絡中路性是創對，競爭和信息的自由流通至關重要。最重要的是，網絡中路性使互能讓網際網路有並接受和傳遞信息的權利的力，(新手段的能產生的行使民事公民，如言論自由，並)在本小冊子中，我們將解釋網絡中路性，為什麼它是重要的，為什麼某些互聯網接入服務提供提認為，他們有興趣在違反它，我們將針對常見的誤解
+ 網路中立性原則是指: 網路上的每一個節點都可以連接到網路上的任何其他節點，且不會因為來源的地或者，數資料的歧而受到。
+ 這此是核是網路的成。網的核心原因絡中路性是創對，競爭和信息資訊由流通至關重要。最重要的是，網絡中路性使互能讓網際網路有力量產生新的方式以行使現有的公民，如言論自由，並與傳播資訊的權力。 本小冊子中，我們將解釋網絡中路性，為什麼它是重要的，為什麼某些有網路提供提認為有意違反中立性們將針也對常見的誤解
- “Allowing broadband carriers to control what people see and do online would fundamentally undermine the principles that have made the Internet such a success”.
+ 做說明。“Allowing broadband carriers to control what people see and do online would fundamentally undermine the principles that have made the Internet such a success”.
- Vint Cerf, founding father of the Internet 01
- *What is Net Neutrality?
+
+ *“若允許寬頻運營商能夠控制線上民眾的閱讀與活動，會讓網際網路獲得成功的大原則，從根本上被破壞” - Vint Cerf , 網際網路之父
+ What is Net Neutrality?
FREEDOM OF communication IN THE DIGITAL ERA
Page 5
（10 行未修改）
and, when they are received, the envelopes can be removed and the pages put back together in the right order.
- When we connect to the Internet, each one of us becomes an endpoint in this global network, with the freedom to connect to any other endpoint, whether this is another person’s computer (“peer-to-peer”), a website, an e-mail system, a video stream or whatever.
+ W
+ 網際網路是個全球去中心化的自動化電腦網路。
+ hen we connect to the Internet, each one of us becomes an endpoint in this global network, with the freedom to connect to any other endpoint, whether this is another person’s computer (“peer-to-peer”), a website, an e-mail system, a video stream or whatever.
The success of the Internet is based on two simple but crucial components of its architecture:
（542 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-08 12:01 – 12:06 | r3199 – r3274 | |
顯示 diff（1 行未修改）
*此為共筆翻譯網路中立性文件的工作頁面，校稿完成後將公佈於相關專頁／網站，有興趣參與的各位，請自行於認領人填上暱稱／ID，並直接於原文上方進行翻譯即可。（為使共筆翻譯順利進行，圖片部分已經先處理完成）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy, WeiHung, 白凜希
- *如果覺得認領的區塊太長，則煩請先自行切分（在自己認領下方貼一次認領人標記），公佈之前我會視情況再切一次
*可以協助校訂的請在此簽名：nchild、
+
+ 若翻譯已完成，請認領人本人勾選
+ *ipa
+ *Isabelhou
+ *Mindos
+ *nchild
+ *pofeng
+ *Portnoy
+ *WeiHung
+ *Weiping
+ *白凜希
+ *雨蒼
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（595 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-08 11:38 – 11:39 | r3191 – r3198 | |
顯示 diff 網路中立性 Net Neutrality
*此為共筆翻譯網路中立性文件的工作頁面，校稿完成後將公佈於相關專頁／網站，有興趣參與的各位，請自行於認領人填上暱稱／ID，並直接於原文上方進行翻譯即可。（為使共筆翻譯順利進行，圖片部分已經先處理完成）
- *也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy, WeiHung
+ *也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy, WeiHung, 白凜希
*如果覺得認領的區塊太長，則煩請先自行切分（在自己認領下方貼一次認領人標記），公佈之前我會視情況再切一次
*可以協助校訂的請在此簽名：nchild、
（323 行未修改）
Pages 16
*以下為原第16頁內容，認領人：
- If there are so many benefits to securing Net Neutrality, what is the situation in Europe? What is being done to protect it?
+ I白凜希f there are so many benefits to securing Net Neutrality, what is the situation in Europe? What is being done to protect it?
In late 2009, European legislators chose not to introduce a legal safeguard to protect Net Neutrality in the “Telecoms Package”. This package obliges access providers to inform end-users about traffic management that they implement on their networks and to offer content or application providers access to their networks at “fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory conditions” 15. Moreover, it says that national regulatory authorities shall promote the ability of end users to access and distribute information and run services and applications of their choice. However, in light of the significant body of evidence, the telecoms package has proven insufficient to efficiently safeguard Net Neutrality 16.
When Vice President Neelie Kroes took office as European Commissioner for the Digital Agenda in 2010, she stated that Net Neutrality would be a central issue on her agenda and launched a first public consultation. However, she moved away from this initial commitment, with one consultation after the other and not much action to ensure a neutral net in Europe.
（4 行未修改）
Pages 17
*以下為原第17頁內容，認領人：
- On 15 October 2012, the European Commission’s latest consultation on Net Neutrality officially ended. On a European level, this was the sixth public consultation on Net Neutrality since Neelie Kroes took office. Only two weeks later, the European Parliament demanded the end of the “wait and see” approach and called “on the Commission to propose legislation to ensure Net Neutrality.” 18
+ O白凜希n 15 October 2012, the European Commission’s latest consultation on Net Neutrality officially ended. On a European level, this was the sixth public consultation on Net Neutrality since Neelie Kroes took office. Only two weeks later, the European Parliament demanded the end of the “wait and see” approach and called “on the Commission to propose legislation to ensure Net Neutrality.” 18
A supplementary unofficial consultation was conducted in autumn 2012, when European Member States and the EU institutions were preparing to participate in the World Conference on International Telecommunications 2012 (WCIT12) 19 organised by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). The goal of the conference was a revision of the International Telecommunication Regulations (ITRs), which is a binding international treaty governing telephone, television and radio networks. The European Telecommunications Network Operators’ Association (ETNO) proposed to include global Internet regulation in the ITRs and tabled an amendment that would allow operators to practice differentiated quality of service delivery as well as to establish “sending party pays” business models. 20 This proposal to globally abandon the “end to end” and Net Neutrality principles was not accepted by the European representatives in the process of revision of the ITRs.
（260 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-08 11:19 – 11:25 | r3160 – r3190 | |
顯示 diff（342 行未修改）
*Page 18/19: Timeline of the Net Neutrality debate in Europe in the last three years.
http://www.tiki-toki.com/timeline/entry/108784/Net-neutrality-in-Europe/
- 201
+ 2
+ *這兩頁是歐洲近三年發生的網路中立性事件，要不要翻請大家提供意見。01
*以下為原第18頁內容，認領人：
（209 行未修改）
*Note
*附註，要不要翻請大家提供意見。
- 01 http://www.commerce.senate.gov/pdf/cerf-020706.pdf
+ 01 http://www.comm（都是英文文獻現在傾向不翻）erce.senate.gov/pdf/cerf-020706.pdf
02 EDRi booklet: How the Internet works http://www.edri.org/files/2012EDRiPapers/how_the_
internet_works.pdf
（40 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-08 09:53 – 09:54 | r3154 – r3159 | |
顯示 diff（530 行未修改）
*EU-wide legislation on Net Neutrality should provide for financial sanctions with a sufficient dissuasive effect.age 23
*以下為原第23頁內容，認領人：
- Best effort The Internet operates on a “best effort” basis in contrast to the telecoms world’s end-to-end voice circuit with a guaranteed Quality of Service.
+ Best effort The Intnchildernet operates on a “best effort” basis in contrast to the telecoms world’s end-to-end voice circuit with a guaranteed Quality of Service.
This is because data traffic is often short and bursty and the overhead involved in trying to reserve resources in advance for such traffic would often be wildly excessive. In addition, there are simply too many networks involved in the Internet to allow all the direct contractual relationships that would be needed for generalised QoS. See also peering.
DOCSIS DOCSIS is an international telecommunications standard that permits the addition of high-speed data transfer to an existing cable TV system.
（5 行未修改）
Page 24
*以下為原第24頁內容，認領人：
- Internet access provider An access provider is a company that offers access to the Internet, that operate fixed/mobile infrastructure or provide access to infrastructure.
+ Internet access pronchildvider An access provider is a company that offers access to the Internet, that operate fixed/mobile infrastructure or provide access to infrastructure.
ISP (Internet Service Provider) ISP is the general term for companies or organisations that provide access to the Internet and related services.
There are different types of ISPs, such as access, hosting, virtual and transit providers.
（56 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-08 05:30 – 05:32 | r3126 – r3153 | |
顯示 diff（518 行未修改）
*以下為原第22頁內容，認領人：
*雨蒼The Internet must be kept neutral and open.
- *Accessibility between all endpoints connected to the Internet without any form of restriction must continue to be upheld.
- *All forms of discriminatory traffic management, such as blocking or throttling should be prohibited, unless as part of objectively necessary traffic management measures.
+ *
+ *網路必須保持中立、開放。Accessibility between all endpoints connected to the Internet without any form of restriction must continue to be upheld.
+ *
+ *網路上的每個端點都之間的連線必須堅守不可受到任何的限制All forms of discriminatory traffic management, such as blocking or throttling should be prohibited, unless as part of objectively necessary traffic management measures.
*Traffic management should only be allowed as a narrowly targeted deviation from the rule. It must be either necessary, proportionate and legally required, or required to address a transient network management problem which cannot be dealt with otherwise.
*Legal clarity must be established to determine what types of traffic management are legitimate under which circumstances.
（75 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-08 04:37 – 04:38 | r3114 – r3125 | |
顯示 diff（1 行未修改）
*此為共筆翻譯網路中立性文件的工作頁面，校稿完成後將公佈於相關專頁／網站，有興趣參與的各位，請自行於認領人填上暱稱／ID，並直接於原文上方進行翻譯即可。（為使共筆翻譯順利進行，圖片部分已經先處理完成）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy, WeiHung
-
*如果覺得認領的區塊太長，則煩請先自行切分（在自己認領下方貼一次認領人標記），公佈之前我會視情況再切一次
+ *可以協助校訂的請在此簽名：nchild、
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（592 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-08 03:04 – 03:04 | r3109 – r3113 | |
顯示 diff（462 行未修改）
*以下為原第2頁內容，認領人：
- n 2011, the former Dutch telecoms
+ n Weiping2011, the former Dutch telecoms
m nopolist KPN announced plans to
m ke users pay extra for data used by
（37 行未修改）
Pages 20~21
*以下為原第20~21頁內容，認領人：
- The first exception aims to ensure that in case of congestion, time-sensitive traffic (such as VoIP) can be prioritised, and that in such cases other traffic may be delayed. Providers should avoid congestion in the first place by adequate investment in capacity. However, if there is congestion, then the measures under this exemption are designed to facilitate end-users’ ability to continue to have maximum access to information, disseminate information
+ TWeipinghe first exception aims to ensure that in case of congestion, time-sensitive traffic (such as VoIP) can be prioritised, and that in such cases other traffic may be delayed. Providers should avoid congestion in the first place by adequate investment in capacity. However, if there is congestion, then the measures under this exemption are designed to facilitate end-users’ ability to continue to have maximum access to information, disseminate information
and use applications or services. The measures should be removed as soon as possible.
The second exception is aimed at blocking traffic that affects the safety or integrity of the network or of the end-user’s terminal device. This can, for example, be traffic from computers that are part of a botnet and which is used for a distributed denial of service attack. A measure must be proportionate and therefore must be restricted to only the traffic that affects security or integrity, and should be used no longer than necessary.
（90 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-08 02:26 – 02:30 | r3060 – r3108 | |
顯示 diff（33 行未修改）
This principle is the central reason for the success of the Internet. Net Neutrality is crucial for innovation, competition and for the free flow of information. Most importantly, Net Neutrality gives the Internet its ability to generate new means of exercising civil rights such as the freedom of expression and the right to receive and impart information.
In this booklet, we will explain Net Neutrality, why it is important, why certain Internet access providers believe that they have an interest in violating it, and we will address common misconceptions
-
- 網路中立性原則是指網路上的每一個節點都可以連接到網路上的任何其他點，不會因為來源的地或者數據類型的歧而受到。
- 這此是核是網路的成。網的核心原因絡中路性是創對，競爭和信息的自由流通至關重要。最重要的是，網絡中路性使互網際網路 ....
- 產生的行使民事權利，如言論自由，並接受和傳遞信息的權利的新手段的能力。
- 在本小冊子中，我們將解釋網絡中立性，為什麼它是重要的，為什麼某些互聯網接入服務提供提認為，他們有興趣在違反它，我們將針對常見的誤解
+ (XXX) 網路中立性原則是指: 網路上的每一個節點都可以連接到網路上的任何其他點，不會因為來源的地或者數據類型的歧而受到。
+ 這此是核是網路的成。網的核心原因絡中路性是創對，競爭和信息的自由流通至關重要。最重要的是，網絡中路性使互能讓網際網路有並接受和傳遞信息的權利的力，(新手段的能產生的行使民事公民，如言論自由，並)在本小冊子中，我們將解釋網絡中路性，為什麼它是重要的，為什麼某些互聯網接入服務提供提認為，他們有興趣在違反它，我們將針對常見的誤解
- “Allowing broadband carriers to control what people see and do online would fundamentally undermine the principles that have made the Internet such a success”.
+ “Allowing broadband carriers to control what people see and do online would fundamentally undermine the principles that have made the Internet such a success”.
- Vint Cerf, founding father of the Internet 01
（557 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-08 02:02 – 02:02 | r3053 – r3059 | |
顯示 diff（307 行未修改）
*
Pages 15
- *以下為原第15頁內容，認領人：Myth 6
+ *以下為原第15頁內容，認領人：ipaMyth 6
Costs are exploding because of data growth
This is untrue for both fixed and mobile network connections. For fixed telephony networks, traffic-related costs are a small percentage of the total connectivity incomes because they have a single line per household, so traffic growth over this segment involves no additional costs. The question is different for cable and mobile networks because the cable and radio access network is shared by users and the costs of adding capacity are significantly higher than they are for fixed networks.
（5 行未修改）
protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU.
*MPages 15
- *以下為原第15頁內容，認領人：
+ *以下為原第15頁內容，認領人：ipa
yth 8
It’s our network, we can do whatever we want with it
（280 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-08 01:42 | r3052 | |
顯示 diff（101 行未修改）
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
S
- 接取提供者侵犯網路中立性以提高獲利ome Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
+ *接取提供者侵犯網路中立性以提高獲利ome Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
（496 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-08 00:52 – 00:53 | r3036 – r3051 | |
顯示 diff（282 行未修改）
Pages 13~14
*以下為原第13~14頁內容，認領人：
+ *Isabelhou
*Myth 1
Net Neutrality is bad for the development of infrastructure – who is going to pay?
（10 行未修改）
Pages 14~15
*以下為原第14~15頁內容，認領人：
- *Myth 4
+ *IsabelhouMyth 4
Net Neutrality legislation isn’t necessary, since customers can “vote with their feet”
If a company is restricting your access, whether blocking websites or services, the European Commission repeatedly stated that customers can switch companies to those who are offering the “full” Internet. However, if I am running a Belgian web service and it is being blocked by access providers in, say, Poland, Greece and Spain, I have no choice as I am not a customer of the foreign providers that are blocking my freedom to conduct business.
（300 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 16:27 – 16:27 | r3018 – r3035 | |
顯示 diff（140 行未修改）
- N1 dicrimination – Ne Net Neutrality is the principle that all types of content and all senders and recipients of information are treated equally. This principle upholds the right to freedom of expression which includes, according to Article 19.2 of the United Nations’ International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICC PR), the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds. Without Net Neutrality, Internet access providers would become gatekeepers of the access to content on the Internet, with the power to decide what we can read and write and with whom we are allowed to communicate.r e as o n
+ N1 dicrimination – Ne Net Neutrality is the principle that all types of content and all senders and recipients of information are treated equally. This principle upholds the right to freedom of expression which includes, according to Article 19.2 of the United Nations’ International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICC PR), the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds. Without Net Neutrality, Internet access providers would become gatekeepers of the access to content on the Internet, with the power to decide what we can read and write and with whom we are allowed to communicate.r e
+ 理由一
+ 有點累了明天繼續翻
+ as o n
hi
s2tFree Expression – The history of the Internet shows very clearly that Net Neutrality encourages creative expression. The ability to publish content and to express opinions online does not depend on financial or social status and is not restricted to an elite. There is a huge trend towards people sharing information and experiences online, sometimes referred to as web 2.0. This means that individuals, small businesses, traditional news sources and large businesses can all create content that is available to everybody. Net Neutrality enables information to travel through the network without being restricted or blocked, thereby enabling a vibrant digital environment, full of ideas and innovation.
（453 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 16:22 – 16:24 | r3004 – r3017 | |
顯示 diff（301 行未修改）
This is a false dilemma. While competition is a necessary mechanism to construct a healthy market, it does not effectively prevent access providers from adopting non-neutral practices. The regulatory framework cannot solely rely on competition and transparency.
It is clear that competition law moves too slowly, and is demonstrably not effective in curbing the problem at hand. In light of the growing, overwhelming evidence that access providers are tampering with end-users’ ability to access the Internet, relying solely on market forces will lead to the development of a multiple-tier Internet, to the detriment of citizens.
- *Myth 6
+ *
+ Pages 15
+ *以下為原第15頁內容，認領人：Myth 6
Costs are exploding because of data growth
This is untrue for both fixed and mobile network connections. For fixed telephony networks, traffic-related costs are a small percentage of the total connectivity incomes because they have a single line per household, so traffic growth over this segment involves no additional costs. The question is different for cable and mobile networks because the cable and radio access network is shared by users and the costs of adding capacity are significantly higher than they are for fixed networks.
However, the progress from 2G to 3G to 4G for mobile and to from EuroDOCSIS 1.x to 2.0 (and soon 3.1) for cable has lead to important reductions in the cost of carrying traffic. This means that even if costs for mobile access are higher, cost per unit is declining. In this case, not only does data traffic growth contribute to profitability for access providers, but it may contribute to lower average costs per data unit carried by the network.
- Pages 15
- *以下為原第15頁內容，認領人：
- *Myth 7
+ Myth 7
Net Neutrality will harm innovation
It is not true that Net Neutrality would stifle innovation, quite the opposite in fact: a failure to enact Net Neutrality protections will undermine content and application providers’ freedom to do business. As explained in chapter 3, a non-neutral regime would hinder innovation in content, as start-ups and smaller companies would suddenly be faced with barriers to enter the market – and uncertainty about what new barriers may be created. The innovators’ freedom to impart information is therefore limited – as is their freedom to do business, being
protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU.
- *Myth 8
+ *MPages 15
+ *以下為原第15頁內容，認領人：
+ yth 8
It’s our network, we can do whatever we want with it
The Internet is a “truly public place” that enables a new frontier of freedom, and serves as a tool to exercise this freedom.” 12 Citizens have grown to depend on the stability, openness and integrity of the Internet to exercise their fundamental rights, including their freedom of expression, access to information and freedom of association. These responsibilities are internationally recognised under the UN Framework, which acknowledges the corporate responsibility to respect human rights. Moreover, the EU Delegation to the 7th International Governance Forum (IGF) stated in 2012 that “the Internet is not just a technology or a digital market space.
（279 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 16:21 – 16:22 | r2994 – r3003 | |
顯示 diff（137 行未修改）
Pages 1~911*以下為原第81內~11容，認領人：
- re as o n
+ reWeiHung as o n
（10 行未修改）
r Pages 11
- *以下為原第11頁內容，認領人：
+ *以下為原第11頁內容，認領人：WeiHung
e as o n
（19 行未修改）
t at the Internet remains an
o en forum in which all voices are treated
- e ually. It ensures that the ability to voice
+ e u笨蛋ally. It ensures that the ability to voice
o inions and place content online does
n t depend on one’s financial capacity or
（8 行未修改）
Pages 11~12
*以下為原第11~12頁內容，認領人：
- r e as o n
+ rWeiHung e as o n
o6ol against censorship
– ithout Net Neutrality,
（42 行未修改）
r
Pages 12
- *以下為原第12頁內容，認領人：
+ *以下為原第12頁內容，認領人：WeiHung
e as o n
（355 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 16:21 – 16:21 | r2987 – r2993 | |
顯示 diff（234 行未修改）
c stomers, or pay potentially thousands of
p oviders to do so.&
- r e as o n
+ r
+ Pages 12
+ *以下為原第12頁內容，認領人：
+ e as o n
9Digital Single Market – Net
（354 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 16:19 – 16:19 | r2981 – r2986 | |
顯示 diff 網路中立性 Net Neutrality
*此為共筆翻譯網路中立性文件的工作頁面，校稿完成後將公佈於相關專頁／網站，有興趣參與的各位，請自行於認領人填上暱稱／ID，並直接於原文上方進行翻譯即可。（為使共筆翻譯順利進行，圖片部分已經先處理完成）
- *也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
+ *也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy, WeiHung
*如果覺得認領的區塊太長，則煩請先自行切分（在自己認領下方貼一次認領人標記），公佈之前我會視情況再切一次
（588 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 16:07 – 16:11 | r2966 – r2980 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為認領的區塊太長，則煩請先自行切分（在自己認領下方貼一次認領人標記），公佈之前
+ *如果覺得認領的區塊太長，則煩請先自行切分（在自己認領下方貼一次認領人標記），公佈之前我會視情況再切一次
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（144 行未修改）
- r e as o n
+ r Pages 11
+ *以下為原第11頁內容，認領人：
+ e as o n
4Access to Information – Net
（435 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 16:07 – 16:07 | r2961 – r2965 | |
顯示 diff（104 行未修改）
- 某些網路接取提供者要求權力來封鎖或調慢網路流量，目的是為了他們自己的商業利益。網路接取提供者不只控制網路互連，也漸漸*Access providers violate Net Neutrality for privatised censorship
+ 某些網路接取提供者要求權力來封鎖或調慢網路流量，目的是為了他們自己的商業利益。網路接取提供者不只控制網路互連，也漸漸開始提供內容、服務，跟應用。*Access providers violate Net Neutrality for privatised censorship
In the UK, blocking measures by access providers have frequently been misused to block unwanted content. For instance, on 4 May 2012, the website of anti-violence advocates “Conciliation Resources” was accidentally blocked by child protection filters on UK mobile networks 04. Another example is Virgin Media. The company provides access to the Internet and increasingly uses Deep Packet Inspection (DPI – see box on page 9). Virgin is now using this same privacy invasive technology to police their network in attempt to protect its own music business. 05 In all of these cases, private companies police their users’ connections to censor what they guess may be unwanted content.
（482 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 16:07 – 16:07 | r2959 – r2960 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為認領的區塊太長，則煩請先自行切分（在自己認領下方貼一次認領人標記）
+ *若認為認領的區塊太長，則煩請先自行切分（在自己認領下方貼一次認領人標記），公佈之前
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（584 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 16:07 – 16:07 | r2955 – r2958 | |
顯示 diff（104 行未修改）
- 某些網路接取提供者要求權力來封鎖或調慢網路流量，目的是為了他們自己的商業利益。網路接取提供者不只控制網路互連，*Access providers violate Net Neutrality for privatised censorship
+ 某些網路接取提供者要求權力來封鎖或調慢網路流量，目的是為了他們自己的商業利益。網路接取提供者不只控制網路互連，也漸漸*Access providers violate Net Neutrality for privatised censorship
In the UK, blocking measures by access providers have frequently been misused to block unwanted content. For instance, on 4 May 2012, the website of anti-violence advocates “Conciliation Resources” was accidentally blocked by child protection filters on UK mobile networks 04. Another example is Virgin Media. The company provides access to the Internet and increasingly uses Deep Packet Inspection (DPI – see box on page 9). Virgin is now using this same privacy invasive technology to police their network in attempt to protect its own music business. 05 In all of these cases, private companies police their users’ connections to censor what they guess may be unwanted content.
（482 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 16:07 | r2954 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為認領的區塊太長，則煩請自行切分（在自己認領下方貼一次認領人標記）
+ *若認為認領的區塊太長，則煩請先自行切分（在自己認領下方貼一次認領人標記）
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（584 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 16:05 – 16:07 | r2931 – r2953 | |
顯示 diff（103 行未修改）
接取提供者侵犯網路中立性以提高獲利ome Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
- *Access providers violate Net Neutrality for privatised censorship
+
+ 某些網路接取提供者要求權力來封鎖或調慢網路流量，目的是為了他們自己的商業利益。網路接取提供者不只控制網路互連，*Access providers violate Net Neutrality for privatised censorship
In the UK, blocking measures by access providers have frequently been misused to block unwanted content. For instance, on 4 May 2012, the website of anti-violence advocates “Conciliation Resources” was accidentally blocked by child protection filters on UK mobile networks 04. Another example is Virgin Media. The company provides access to the Internet and increasingly uses Deep Packet Inspection (DPI – see box on page 9). Virgin is now using this same privacy invasive technology to police their network in attempt to protect its own music business. 05 In all of these cases, private companies police their users’ connections to censor what they guess may be unwanted content.
（482 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 16:00 | r2930 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為認領的區塊太長，則請自行切分（在自己認領下方貼一次認領人標記）
+ *若認為認領的區塊太長，則煩請自行切分（在自己認領下方貼一次認領人標記）
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（583 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 16:00 – 16:00 | r2927 – r2929 | |
顯示 diff（101 行未修改）
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
S
- ome Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
+ 接取提供者侵犯網路中立性以提高獲利ome Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality for privatised censorship
（484 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 – 16:00 | r2924 – r2926 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為認領的區塊太長，則請自行切分
+ *若認為認領的區塊太長，則請自行切分（在自己認領下方貼一次認領人標記）
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（583 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 – 15:59 | r2922 – r2923 | |
顯示 diff（98 行未修改）
- 網路中立性不被眾的理由非常多，以下是最常聽見的一些
+ 網路中立性不被眾的理由非常多，以下是最常聽見的一些：
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
- Some Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
+ S
+ ome Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality for privatised censorship
（484 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2921 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為認領的區塊太長，則請自行切ㄈ
+ *若認為認領的區塊太長，則請自行切分
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（582 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2920 | |
顯示 diff（98 行未修改）
- 網路中立性不被眾的理由非常多，以下是最常聽見的一ㄒㄧ
+ 網路中立性不被眾的理由非常多，以下是最常聽見的一些
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
Some Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
（486 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2919 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為認領的區塊太長，則請自行切
+ *若認為認領的區塊太長，則請自行切ㄈ
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（582 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 – 15:59 | r2917 – r2918 | |
顯示 diff（98 行未修改）
- 網路中立性不被眾的理由非常多，以下是最常聽見
+ 網路中立性不被眾的理由非常多，以下是最常聽見的一ㄒㄧ
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
Some Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
（486 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2916 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為認領的區塊太長，則請自行ㄑㄧㄝ
+ *若認為認領的區塊太長，則請自行切
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（582 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2915 | |
顯示 diff（98 行未修改）
- 網路中立性不被眾的理由非常多，以下是最常聽
+ 網路中立性不被眾的理由非常多，以下是最常聽見
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
Some Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
（486 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2914 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為認領的區塊太長，則請自行ㄑㄧ
+ *若認為認領的區塊太長，則請自行ㄑㄧㄝ
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（582 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2913 | |
顯示 diff（98 行未修改）
- 網路中立性不被眾的理由非常多，以下是最常
+ 網路中立性不被眾的理由非常多，以下是最常聽
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
Some Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
（486 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2912 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為認領的區塊太長，則請自行
+ *若認為認領的區塊太長，則請自行ㄑㄧ
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（582 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2911 | |
顯示 diff（98 行未修改）
- 網路中立性不被眾的理由非常多，以下是最ㄔ
+ 網路中立性不被眾的理由非常多，以下是最常
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
Some Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
（486 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2910 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為認領的區塊太長，則請自行分
+ *若認為認領的區塊太長，則請自行
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（582 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 – 15:59 | r2908 – r2909 | |
顯示 diff（98 行未修改）
- 網路中立性不被眾的理由非常多，以下是
+ 網路中立性不被眾的理由非常多，以下是最ㄔ
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
Some Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
（486 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2907 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為認領的區塊太長，則請自行ㄈㄣ
+ *若認為認領的區塊太長，則請自行分
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（582 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2906 | |
顯示 diff（98 行未修改）
- 網路中立性不被眾的理由非常多，以下
+ 網路中立性不被眾的理由非常多，以下是
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
Some Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
（486 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2905 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為認領的區塊太長，則請自行
+ *若認為認領的區塊太長，則請自行ㄈㄣ
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（582 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2904 | |
顯示 diff（98 行未修改）
- 網路中立性不被眾的理由非常多，以
+ 網路中立性不被眾的理由非常多，以下
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
Some Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
（486 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2903 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為認領的區塊太長，則請自行酚
+ *若認為認領的區塊太長，則請自行
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（582 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2902 | |
顯示 diff（98 行未修改）
- 網路中立性不被眾的理由非常多，
+ 網路中立性不被眾的理由非常多，以
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
Some Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
（486 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2901 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為認領的區塊太長，
+ *若認為認領的區塊太長，則請自行酚
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（582 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 – 15:59 | r2895 – r2900 | |
顯示 diff（98 行未修改）
- 網路中立性網路中立性的重要性
+ 網路中立性不被眾的理由非常多，
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
Some Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
（486 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 – 15:59 | r2892 – r2894 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為認領的太長，
+ *若認為認領的區塊太長，
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（582 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2891 | |
顯示 diff（98 行未修改）
- 網路中立性網路中立性的重要ㄒㄧ
+ 網路中立性網路中立性的重要性
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
Some Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
（486 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2890 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為認領太長，
+ *若認為認領的太長，
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（582 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2889 | |
顯示 diff（98 行未修改）
- 網路中立性網路中立性的重要
+ 網路中立性網路中立性的重要ㄒㄧ
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
Some Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
（486 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2888 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為任ㄌㄧㄥ太長，
+ *若認為認領太長，
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（582 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2887 | |
顯示 diff（98 行未修改）
- 網路中立性網路中立性的ㄓㄨ
+ 網路中立性網路中立性的重要
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
Some Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
（486 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2886 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為任ㄌ太長，
+ *若認為任ㄌㄧㄥ太長，
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（582 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2885 | |
顯示 diff（98 行未修改）
- 網路中立性網路中立性的
+ 網路中立性網路中立性的ㄓㄨ
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
Some Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
（486 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2884 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為太長，
+ *若認為任ㄌ太長，
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（582 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2883 | |
顯示 diff（98 行未修改）
- 網路中立性
+ 網路中立性網路中立性的
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
Some Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
（486 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 – 15:59 | r2881 – r2882 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為想翻的地太長，
+ *若認為太長，
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（582 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2880 | |
顯示 diff（97 行未修改）
TPortnoyhere are many reasons why Net Neutrality is not respected, among the most frequent ones are:
-
+ 網路中立性
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
Some Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
（486 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2879 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為想翻的地方太長，
+ *若認為想翻的地太長，
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（582 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 – 15:59 | r2874 – r2878 | |
顯示 diff（97 行未修改）
TPortnoyhere are many reasons why Net Neutrality is not respected, among the most frequent ones are:
+
+
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
Some Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
（486 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 – 15:59 | r2868 – r2873 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為想翻的地ㄈ
+ *若認為想翻的地方太長，
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（580 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2867 | |
顯示 diff（105 行未修改）
Pages 8~9
*以下為原第8~9頁內容，認領人：
- *PortnoAccess providers violate Net Neutrality to comply with the law
+ *PortnoyAccess providers violate Net Neutrality to comply with the law
Governments are increasingly asking access and service providers to restrict certain types of traffic, to filter and monitor the Internet to enforce the law. A decade ago, there were only four countries filtering and censoring the Internet worldwide – today, they are over forty.
6 n Europe, website blocking has been
（477 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2866 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為想翻的地
+ *若認為想翻的地ㄈ
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（580 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2865 | |
顯示 diff（105 行未修改）
Pages 8~9
*以下為原第8~9頁內容，認領人：
- *PorAccess providers violate Net Neutrality to comply with the law
+ *PortnoAccess providers violate Net Neutrality to comply with the law
Governments are increasingly asking access and service providers to restrict certain types of traffic, to filter and monitor the Internet to enforce the law. A decade ago, there were only four countries filtering and censoring the Internet worldwide – today, they are over forty.
6 n Europe, website blocking has been
（477 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2864 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為想翻的
+ *若認為想翻的地
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（580 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2863 | |
顯示 diff（105 行未修改）
Pages 8~9
*以下為原第8~9頁內容，認領人：
- *PoAccess providers violate Net Neutrality to comply with the law
+ *PorAccess providers violate Net Neutrality to comply with the law
Governments are increasingly asking access and service providers to restrict certain types of traffic, to filter and monitor the Internet to enforce the law. A decade ago, there were only four countries filtering and censoring the Internet worldwide – today, they are over forty.
6 n Europe, website blocking has been
（477 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2862 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若認為想翻ㄉㄜ
+ *若認為想翻的
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（580 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2861 | |
顯示 diff（105 行未修改）
Pages 8~9
*以下為原第8~9頁內容，認領人：
- *PAccess providers violate Net Neutrality to comply with the law
+ *PoAccess providers violate Net Neutrality to comply with the law
Governments are increasingly asking access and service providers to restrict certain types of traffic, to filter and monitor the Internet to enforce the law. A decade ago, there were only four countries filtering and censoring the Internet worldwide – today, they are over forty.
6 n Europe, website blocking has been
（477 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2860 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *若
+ *若認為想翻ㄉㄜ
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（580 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:59 | r2859 | |
顯示 diff（105 行未修改）
Pages 8~9
*以下為原第8~9頁內容，認領人：
- *Access providers violate Net Neutrality to comply with the law
+ *PAccess providers violate Net Neutrality to comply with the law
Governments are increasingly asking access and service providers to restrict certain types of traffic, to filter and monitor the Internet to enforce the law. A decade ago, there were only four countries filtering and censoring the Internet worldwide – today, they are over forty.
6 n Europe, website blocking has been
（477 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:58 – 15:58 | r2855 – r2858 | |
顯示 diff（587 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:58 – 15:58 | r2852 – r2854 | |
顯示 diff（95 行未修改）
Pages 8
*以下為原第8頁內容，認領人：
- TPhere are many reasons why Net Neutrality is not respected, among the most frequent ones are:
+ TPortnoyhere are many reasons why Net Neutrality is not respected, among the most frequent ones are:
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
（487 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:58 | r2851 | |
顯示 diff（2 行未修改）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
- *
+ *若
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（580 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:58 | r2850 | |
顯示 diff（95 行未修改）
Pages 8
*以下為原第8頁內容，認領人：
- There are many reasons why Net Neutrality is not respected, among the most frequent ones are:
+ TPhere are many reasons why Net Neutrality is not respected, among the most frequent ones are:
*Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
（487 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:58 – 15:58 | r2847 – r2849 | |
顯示 diff（1 行未修改）
*此為共筆翻譯網路中立性文件的工作頁面，校稿完成後將公佈於相關專頁／網站，有興趣參與的各位，請自行於認領人填上暱稱／ID，並直接於原文上方進行翻譯即可。（為使共筆翻譯順利進行，圖片部分已經先處理完成）
*也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
+
+ *
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（580 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:58 – 15:58 | r2844 – r2846 | |
顯示 diff（503 行未修改）
Pages 22
*以下為原第22頁內容，認領人：
- *The Internet must be kept neutral and open.
+ *雨蒼The Internet must be kept neutral and open.
*Accessibility between all endpoints connected to the Internet without any form of restriction must continue to be upheld.
*All forms of discriminatory traffic management, such as blocking or throttling should be prohibited, unless as part of objectively necessary traffic management measures.
（77 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:58 – 15:58 | r2835 – r2843 | |
顯示 diff 網路中立性 Net Neutrality
*此為共筆翻譯網路中立性文件的工作頁面，校稿完成後將公佈於相關專頁／網站，有興趣參與的各位，請自行於認領人填上暱稱／ID，並直接於原文上方進行翻譯即可。（為使共筆翻譯順利進行，圖片部分已經先處理完成）
- *也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos
+ *也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos、Portnoy
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（580 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:48 – 15:55 | r2816 – r2834 | |
顯示 diff 網路中立性 Net Neutrality
*此為共筆翻譯網路中立性文件的工作頁面，校稿完成後將公佈於相關專頁／網站，有興趣參與的各位，請自行於認領人填上暱稱／ID，並直接於原文上方進行翻譯即可。（為使共筆翻譯順利進行，圖片部分已經先處理完成）
- *也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng
+ *也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng、mindos
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（41 行未修改）
*以下為原第5頁內容，認領人：
- *
+ Mindos*
圖一：開放中立接取模式
（15 行未修改）
Pages 6~7
*以下為原第6~7頁內容，認領人：
- *
+ *Mindos
（514 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-07 15:43 – 15:48 | r2743 – r2815 | |
顯示 diff（26 行未修改）
*
- *以下為前言與引述，認領人：
+ *以下為前言與引述，認領人：pofeng
+
Net Neutrality is the principle that every point on the network can connect to any other point on the network, without discrimination on the basis of origin, destination or type of data.
This principle is the central reason for the success of the Internet. Net Neutrality is crucial for innovation, competition and for the free flow of information. Most importantly, Net Neutrality gives the Internet its ability to generate new means of exercising civil rights such as the freedom of expression and the right to receive and impart information.
In this booklet, we will explain Net Neutrality, why it is important, why certain Internet access providers believe that they have an interest in violating it, and we will address common misconceptions
+
+ 網路中立性原則是指網路上的每一個節點都可以連接到網路上的任何其他點，不會因為來源的地或者數據類型的歧而受到。
+ 這此是核是網路的成。網的核心原因絡中路性是創對，競爭和信息的自由流通至關重要。最重要的是，網絡中路性使互網際網路 ....
+
+ 產生的行使民事權利，如言論自由，並接受和傳遞信息的權利的新手段的能力。
+ 在本小冊子中，我們將解釋網絡中立性，為什麼它是重要的，為什麼某些互聯網接入服務提供提認為，他們有興趣在違反它，我們將針對常見的誤解
“Allowing broadband carriers to control what people see and do online would fundamentally undermine the principles that have made the Internet such a success”.
（544 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-01 12:29 – 12:29 | r2740 – r2742 | |
顯示 diff 網路中立性 Net Neutrality
*此為共筆翻譯網路中立性文件的工作頁面，校稿完成後將公佈於相關專頁／網站，有興趣參與的各位，請自行於認領人填上暱稱／ID，並直接於原文上方進行翻譯即可。（為使共筆翻譯順利進行，圖片部分已經先處理完成）
- *也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、
+ *也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、pofeng
說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
（573 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-01 08:24 – 12:00 | r8 – r2739 | |
顯示 diff 網路中立性 Net Neutrality
+ *此為共筆翻譯網路中立性文件的工作頁面，校稿完成後將公佈於相關專頁／網站，有興趣參與的各位，請自行於認領人填上暱稱／ID，並直接於原文上方進行翻譯即可。（為使共筆翻譯順利進行，圖片部分已經先處理完成）
+ *也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild、
- *！！！尚未貼完，請勿開始！！！
- *說明：此為共筆翻譯網路中立性文件的工作頁面，校稿完成後將公佈於相關專頁／網站，有興趣參與的各位，請自行於認領人填上暱稱／ID，並直接於原文上方進行翻譯即可。
- *也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild
+ 說明：2013在台灣，接連發生與網路中立性有關的事件（詳見挑戰總開關），實質損害雖尚未發生或未能證明，但隱憂已不可忽視，進入2014，智財局研議、電信法（及／或匯流法）、網路防護機構、國安法等立法、政策，或實施仍將接踵而至，如果推動網路中立性立法是長期目標，那麼現在開始研擬已經成為刻不容緩的任務，這份介紹網路中立性的文件來自於歐洲網路中立倡議團體，應可作為基礎觀念討論與釐清之用，當然，他山之石不見得完全適用，但仍可作為一個前進的起點。
來源：歐洲數位權利（European Digital Right, ERDi）文件08 2013.11.05 出版
授權方式：創用CC 姓名標示-非商業性-相同方式分享3.0（CC BY-NC-SA 3.0）
+ 原作標示：
+ *Booklet written by:
+ *Kirsten Fiedler, Advocacy Manager
+ *Joe McNamee, Executive Director
+ *With condtibutions by EDRi members
+ *Edited by:
+ *EDRi & Digital Courage (Germany)
+ *European Digital Rights
+ *20 Rue Belliard
+ *1040 Brussels
+ *tel: + 32 (0) 2 274 25 70
+ *brussels@edri.org
+ *Design by: CtrlSPATIE
+ *European Digital Rights (EDRi) is an association of 35 privacy and digital civil rights associations from 21 Countries.
- *以下為前言與引言，認領人：
+ *網路中立性 NET NEUTRALITY
+ *
+
+ *
+
+ *以下為前言與引述，認領人：
Net Neutrality is the principle that every point on the network can connect to any other point on the network, without discrimination on the basis of origin, destination or type of data.
- This principle is the central reason for the success of the Internet. Net Neutrality is crucial
- for innovation, competition and for the free flow of information. Most importantly, Net Neutrality gives the Internet its ability to generate new means of exercising civil rights such as the freedom of expression and the right to receive and impart information.
+ This principle is the central reason for the success of the Internet. Net Neutrality is crucial for innovation, competition and for the free flow of information. Most importantly, Net Neutrality gives the Internet its ability to generate new means of exercising civil rights such as the freedom of expression and the right to receive and impart information.
In this booklet, we will explain Net Neutrality, why it is important, why certain Internet access providers believe that they have an interest in violating it, and we will address common misconceptions
- “Allowing broadband carriers to control what people see and do online would fundamentally
- undermine the principles that have made the Internet such a success”.
+ “Allowing broadband carriers to control what people see and do online would fundamentally undermine the principles that have made the Internet such a success”.
- Vint Cerf, founding father of the Internet 01
- *認領人：
*What is Net Neutrality?
FREEDOM OF communication IN THE DIGITAL ERA
+ Page 5
+ *以下為原第5頁內容，認領人：
- *認領人：
+ *
+
+ 圖一：開放中立接取模式
+
+ *
+ fig 1: Open neutral access model
+
+ The Internet is a global, interconnected and decentralised autonomous computer network. We can access the Internet via connections provided by Internet access providers. These access providers transmit the information that we send over the Internet in so-called data “packets”. The way in which data is sent and received on the Internet can be compared to sending the pages of a book by post in lots of different envelopes. 02 The post office can send the pages by different routes
+ and, when they are received, the envelopes can be removed and the pages put back together in the right order.
+
+ When we connect to the Internet, each one of us becomes an endpoint in this global network, with the freedom to connect to any other endpoint, whether this is another person’s computer (“peer-to-peer”), a website, an e-mail system, a video stream or whatever.
+
+ The success of the Internet is based on two simple but crucial components of its architecture:
+
+ 1. Every connected device can connect to every other connected device.
+
+ 2. All services use the “Internet Protocol,” which is sufficiently flexible and simple to carry all types of content (video, e-mail, messaging etc) unlike networks that are designed for just one purpose, such as the voice telephony system.
+
+ Pages 6~7
+ *以下為原第6~7頁內容，認領人：
+ *
+
+
+ 圖二：不中立接取模式
+ *
+ fig 2: Non-neutral access model
+
+ Net Neutrality is most commonly defined as the principle that Internet users can connect to any other point in the network. Users can create, access and use any content, service and application they choose, without discrimination, restriction or limitation imposed by those who run the infrastructure.
+
+ Internet access providers enable us to communicate, browse the web or transfer files over the Internet, to make our own websites globally available and to use services such as email, social media or Internet telephony. Everybody, and in whatever role, and all organisations, of whatever size and style, is able to participate globally. Everybody is able to access services and to offer services.
+
+ Let’s say you want to watch a video online:
+ You connect to the Internet, open your browser and navigate to the video service of your choice. This is possible because the access provider does not seek to restrict your options.
+
+ Without Net Neutrality you might instead find that your connection to video service A is being slowed down by your access provider in a way that makes it impossible for you to watch the video. At the same time, you would still be able to connect rapidly to video service B and maybe watch exactly the same content. Why would your access provider do such a thing? There are many reasons: for example, the internet access provider might a) have signed an exclusive agreement with this second video platform or b) provide their own video services and therefore want to encourage you to use these instead of the service that you initially preferred.
+
+ This is just one of the many reasons for violations of Net Neutrality. Such discriminatory measures are often called “traffic management”. We will explain the most common reasons for violations of Net Neutrality in the following chapter.
+
+ “I don’t believe that restricting consumers’ choice can ever be an appealing driver of more growth.
+ I certainly don’t believe that restricting access to the internet will attract many more innovative European internet companies. And I don’t believe that restricted access to the internet is the right answer to a faster deployment of Next Generation Access Networks.”
+ - European Commission Vice President
+ Viviane Reding, September 2008 03
+
*Why is Net Neutrality violated?
THE THREE MAIN REASONS
+ Pages 8
+ *以下為原第8頁內容，認領人：
+ There are many reasons why Net Neutrality is not respected, among the most frequent ones are:
+
+ *Access providers violate Net Neutrality to optimise profits
+ Some Internet access providers demand the right to block or slow down Internet traffic for their own commercial benefit. Internet access providers are not only in control of Internet connections, they also increasingly start to provide content, services and applications. They are increasingly looking for the power to become the “gatekeepers” of the Internet. For example, the Dutch telecoms access provider KPN tried to make their customers use KPN’s own text-messaging service instead of web-based chat services by blocking these free services. Another notable example of discrimination is T-Mobile’s blocking of Internet telephony services (Voice over IP, or VoIP in short), provided for example by Skype, in order to give priority to their own and their business partners’ services.
+
+ *Access providers violate Net Neutrality for privatised censorship
+ In the UK, blocking measures by access providers have frequently been misused to block unwanted content. For instance, on 4 May 2012, the website of anti-violence advocates “Conciliation Resources” was accidentally blocked by child protection filters on UK mobile networks 04. Another example is Virgin Media. The company provides access to the Internet and increasingly uses Deep Packet Inspection (DPI – see box on page 9). Virgin is now using this same privacy invasive technology to police their network in attempt to protect its own music business. 05 In all of these cases, private companies police their users’ connections to censor what they guess may be unwanted content.
+
+ Pages 8~9
+ *以下為原第8~9頁內容，認領人：
+ *Access providers violate Net Neutrality to comply with the law
+ Governments are increasingly asking access and service providers to restrict certain types of traffic, to filter and monitor the Internet to enforce the law. A decade ago, there were only four countries filtering and censoring the Internet worldwide – today, they are over forty.
+ 6 n Europe, website blocking has been
+ ntroduced for instance in Belgium, France,
+ taly, the UK and Ireland. This is done for
+ easons as varied as protecting national
+ ambling monopolies and implementing
+ emonstrably ineffective efforts to protect
+ opyright.
+
+ Some politicians call for Net Neutrality
+ nd demand filtering or blocking for
+ aw enforcement purposes at the
+ ame time. However, it is a paradox to
+ reate legal incentives for operators
+ o invest in monitoring and filtering or
+ locking technology, while at the same
+ ime demanding that they do not use
+ his technology for their own business
+ urposes.
+ *Deep Packet Inspection (DPI)
+ Information that we send and receive through the Internet travels in so-called “packets”, with “envelopes” indicating sender and receiver. Unlike normal network equipment, DPI looks not just at the envelopes but into packet contents, and can be used to disrupt or block certain packets based on what they contain.
+ DPI can be used for innocuous reasons (to fight spam or viruses), but also to carry out surveillance or to censor information as this technology makes it possible to capture information from network traffic and assess it in real time. In Russia for instance, Cisco’s Deep Packet Inspection solutions are allegedly being used by the government to block access to certain websites. 07 Cisco’s DPI tools are also being used in Germany by T-Mobile 08 on mobile networks.
*10 Reasons for Net Neutrality
- *Myths & Truths
- *The situation in the European Union
+
+ Pages 1~911*以下為原第81內~11容，認領人：
+
+ re as o n
+
+
+ N1 dicrimination – Ne Net Neutrality is the principle that all types of content and all senders and recipients of information are treated equally. This principle upholds the right to freedom of expression which includes, according to Article 19.2 of the United Nations’ International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICC PR), the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds. Without Net Neutrality, Internet access providers would become gatekeepers of the access to content on the Internet, with the power to decide what we can read and write and with whom we are allowed to communicate.r e as o n
+ hi
+ s2tFree Expression – The history of the Internet shows very clearly that Net Neutrality encourages creative expression. The ability to publish content and to express opinions online does not depend on financial or social status and is not restricted to an elite. There is a huge trend towards people sharing information and experiences online, sometimes referred to as web 2.0. This means that individuals, small businesses, traditional news sources and large businesses can all create content that is available to everybody. Net Neutrality enables information to travel through the network without being restricted or blocked, thereby enabling a vibrant digital environment, full of ideas and innovation.
+
+ r e as o n
+
+ 3Privacy – Measures to undermine Net Neutrality can have a direct impact on our privacy (DPI – see box on page 9). In a non-neutral Internet, providers would be able to monitor our
+ communications in order to differentiate between messaging, streaming, peer-topeer
+ (P2P), e-mails and so on. According to a recent study, some European access providers are already doing so via the use of Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) for their commercial benefit. 09 The reuse of this technology for government or intelligence purposes is inevitable.
+
+
+ r e as o n
+
+ 4Access to Information – Net
+ eutrality is also the catalyst
+ or the creation of diverse and
+ bundant online content. Nonprofit
+ rojects like Wikipedia, blogs and
+ ser-generated content in general have
+ he same conditions to access and publish
+ nformation as large, commercial Internet
+ layers. Without Net Neutrality, we would
+ ave a two-tier Internet where only those
+ ho can pay would be able to access
+ nformation or get content delivered faster
+ than other users.
+ D
+ r e as o n
+
+ 5emocratic Process – Net
+ N utrality improves the quality
+ o democracy by ensuring
+ t at the Internet remains an
+ o en forum in which all voices are treated
+ e ually. It ensures that the ability to voice
+ o inions and place content online does
+ n t depend on one’s financial capacity or
+ s cial status. It is therefore a powerful tool
+ i facilitating democracy, enabling diverse
+ i eas to be expressed and heard.
+ T
+
+ “The concept of Net Neutrality builds on the view that information on the Internet should be transmitted impartially, without regard to content, destination or source. By looking into users’ Internet communications, ISPs may breach the existing rules on the confidentiality of communications, which is a fundamental right that must be carefully preserved. A serious policy debate on Net Neutrality must make sure that users’ confidentiality of communications is effectively protected.”
+ - European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) on Net Neutrality,
+
+ Pages 11~12
+ *以下為原第11~12頁內容，認領人：
+ r e as o n
+ o6ol against censorship
+ – ithout Net Neutrality,
+ ne work operators can block
+ or throttle not only services,hs but also content. The fundamental shift in information communications technologies over the last 10 years has facilitated revolutions and it offers the possibility of
+ greater social reforms through greater transparency and the free flow of information.
+ r e as o n
+
+ 7Consumer choice – Net
+ eutrality ensures access
+ o content and offers greater
+ onsumer choice by allowing
+ ore players to enter the marketplace.
+ herefore, the amount of online
+ information is vast and growing, leading
+ o intellectual and cultural interaction that
+ as scarcely imaginable twenty years ago.
+ ithout a neutral net, access providers
+ an prioritise applications or services,
+ hereby creating “walled gardens” in which
+ onsumer choice is limited.
+
+ r e as o n
+
+ 8nnovation and competition
+ – Net Neutrality continues to
+ f ster innovation, as individuals
+ and companies alike can create
+ c ntent and provide new services with
+ t e online world as their audience. Any
+ i dividual can upload content at relatively
+ l ttle cost. An unrestricted Internet gives
+ m rket access to small and medium
+ e terprises or start-ups that might not
+ otherwise have a competitive edge against
+ l rger corporations. Without Net Neutrality
+ however, access providers are allowed
+ t restrict access needed by innovators
+ t at seek to develop online services.
+ I novators would have a smaller and less
+ p edictable marketplace for their services.
+ F r example, a start-up company might
+ n t be able to reach all access providers’
+ c stomers, or pay potentially thousands of
+ p oviders to do so.&
+ r e as o n
+
+ 9Digital Single Market – Net
+ eutrality is a cornerstone for
+ he completion of the Digital
+ Single Market. It removes
+ arriers and allows users to freely
+ ommunicate, fully express themselves,
+ ccess information and participate in
+ he public debate – without unnecessary
+ interference by gatekeepers or middlemen.
+ y contrast, a non-neutral Internet
+ ontributes to the fragmentation of the
+ igital Single Market. The European
+ arliament acknowledged this danger
+ y adopting a resolution on “Completing
+ he Digital Single Market” 10 in October
+ 012, in which it “calls on the Commission
+ o propose legislation to ensure Net
+ eutrality”.
+
+ r e as o n
+ 1rotecting a global Internet
+ – s soon as access providers
+ st rt making use of traffic
+ discrimination tools to interfere
+ in global communications for their own
+ co mercial benefit, governments will
+ be tempted to use the technology for
+ pu lic policy goals – in fact, Western
+ governments are more and more often
+ as ing providers to restrict certain types
+ of traffic, and to filter and monitor the
+ In ernet to enforce the law. In other parts
+ of the world this has lead to “national
+ In ernets”, such as the “Chinternet” in
+ Ch na and the “halal” Internet in Iran. The
+ pr nciple of Net Neutrality will help protect
+ th global Internet.Truths
+ *The situatio
+ Pages 13~14
+ *以下為原第13~14頁內容，認領人：
+ *Myth 1
+ Net Neutrality is bad for the development of infrastructure – who is going to pay?
+ The availability of content is a factor that stimulates broadband investment. Revenues from broadband and mobile access are dependent on demand for web-based content and applications. This has been empirically proven through the PLUM 11 study, which found that “the ability of consumers to access Internet content, applications and services is the reason consumers are willing to pay Internet access providers. Access providers are dependent on this demand to monetise their substantial investments.”
+ Some Internet access providers argue that application and content providers “free-ride” on network investment made by others. This claim is baseless, because users already pay for content and applications, which allows access providers to profit from their investment in networks. Content and applications providers buy services from access providers, purchase network access and services. Moreover, consumers’ demand to use high-bandwidth applications, such as peer-to-peer and streaming music and video, creates demand for faster Internet connections, more revenue for access providers and, ultimately, fuels investment in infrastructure.
+ *Myth 2
+ Net Neutrality legislation would mean no network management, causing problems for the quality of the Internet
+ It is not true that legislation protecting Net Neutrality would prevent access providers from managing their networks. In fact, the Transmission Control Protocol (“flow rate fairness”) that is at the core of Internet engineering has been one of the greatest congestion management tools that has helped make the Internet such a success.
+ What Net Neutrality would prevent is not traffic management, but rather arbitrary restrictions implemented by access providers that are designed to undermine the openness of the Internet as a shortterm measure to make extra profits.
+ *Myth 3
+ Charging application and content providers will help promote broadband investment
+ Some access providers time and again have publicly expressed their will to charge content and application providers – in addition to access charges already paid by end-users – arguing that this will help investment in next generation networks. This is a dangerous approach because there are no existing obligations that would guarantee that access providers use any additional revenue for investment. In fact, they might even prefer to opt for less investment, since lower quality for basic Internet service may encourage the adoption of non-neutral (and more expensive) “premium” services.
+
+ Pages 14~15
+ *以下為原第14~15頁內容，認領人：
+ *Myth 4
+ Net Neutrality legislation isn’t necessary, since customers can “vote with their feet”
+ If a company is restricting your access, whether blocking websites or services, the European Commission repeatedly stated that customers can switch companies to those who are offering the “full” Internet. However, if I am running a Belgian web service and it is being blocked by access providers in, say, Poland, Greece and Spain, I have no choice as I am not a customer of the foreign providers that are blocking my freedom to conduct business.
+ For consumers, good switching is insufficient in an industry where they are tied into lengthy contracts, as their ability to switch providers may not be feasible in practice. End-users can be left in a restricted, low quality slow lane, or a fast lane with fewer destinations to reach, without even knowing about it.
+ *Myth 5
+ There is no need for regulation, let the market decide
+ This is a false dilemma. While competition is a necessary mechanism to construct a healthy market, it does not effectively prevent access providers from adopting non-neutral practices. The regulatory framework cannot solely rely on competition and transparency.
+ It is clear that competition law moves too slowly, and is demonstrably not effective in curbing the problem at hand. In light of the growing, overwhelming evidence that access providers are tampering with end-users’ ability to access the Internet, relying solely on market forces will lead to the development of a multiple-tier Internet, to the detriment of citizens.
+ *Myth 6
+ Costs are exploding because of data growth
+ This is untrue for both fixed and mobile network connections. For fixed telephony networks, traffic-related costs are a small percentage of the total connectivity incomes because they have a single line per household, so traffic growth over this segment involves no additional costs. The question is different for cable and mobile networks because the cable and radio access network is shared by users and the costs of adding capacity are significantly higher than they are for fixed networks.
+ However, the progress from 2G to 3G to 4G for mobile and to from EuroDOCSIS 1.x to 2.0 (and soon 3.1) for cable has lead to important reductions in the cost of carrying traffic. This means that even if costs for mobile access are higher, cost per unit is declining. In this case, not only does data traffic growth contribute to profitability for access providers, but it may contribute to lower average costs per data unit carried by the network.
+
+ Pages 15
+ *以下為原第15頁內容，認領人：
+ *Myth 7
+ Net Neutrality will harm innovation
+ It is not true that Net Neutrality would stifle innovation, quite the opposite in fact: a failure to enact Net Neutrality protections will undermine content and application providers’ freedom to do business. As explained in chapter 3, a non-neutral regime would hinder innovation in content, as start-ups and smaller companies would suddenly be faced with barriers to enter the market – and uncertainty about what new barriers may be created. The innovators’ freedom to impart information is therefore limited – as is their freedom to do business, being
+ protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU.
+ *Myth 8
+ It’s our network, we can do whatever we want with it
+ The Internet is a “truly public place” that enables a new frontier of freedom, and serves as a tool to exercise this freedom.” 12 Citizens have grown to depend on the stability, openness and integrity of the Internet to exercise their fundamental rights, including their freedom of expression, access to information and freedom of association. These responsibilities are internationally recognised under the UN Framework, which acknowledges the corporate responsibility to respect human rights. Moreover, the EU Delegation to the 7th International Governance Forum (IGF) stated in 2012 that “the Internet is not just a technology or a digital market space.
+ *Myth 9
+ Net Neutrality is a problem in the US , not in Europe
+ There is overwhelming evidence that European access providers, particularly in the mobile sector, are using technical measures to tamper with end-users’ ability to access the Internet for their own commercial interests.
+ For example, recent findings from BEREC (the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications) show that this is indeed a problem in Europe, where more and more operators are restricting access to content (such as P2P sites), services (such as VoIP) and degrading the quality of Internet connections. In addition, the evidence collected through citizen platforms such as Glasnost 13 and Respect My Net 14 provides a crystal clear picture of the numerous, harmful neutrality violations already taking place in Europe.
+
+ in the European Union
Waiting for net neutrality
- *The Netherlands: A case study
+ *The Netherla
+ Pages 16
+ *以下為原第16頁內容，認領人：
+ If there are so many benefits to securing Net Neutrality, what is the situation in Europe? What is being done to protect it?
+ In late 2009, European legislators chose not to introduce a legal safeguard to protect Net Neutrality in the “Telecoms Package”. This package obliges access providers to inform end-users about traffic management that they implement on their networks and to offer content or application providers access to their networks at “fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory conditions” 15. Moreover, it says that national regulatory authorities shall promote the ability of end users to access and distribute information and run services and applications of their choice. However, in light of the significant body of evidence, the telecoms package has proven insufficient to efficiently safeguard Net Neutrality 16.
+ When Vice President Neelie Kroes took office as European Commissioner for the Digital Agenda in 2010, she stated that Net Neutrality would be a central issue on her agenda and launched a first public consultation. However, she moved away from this initial commitment, with one consultation after the other and not much action to ensure a neutral net in Europe.
+ In 2011, the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS), warned that violations of Net Neutrality could have “serious implications” for end-users’ fundamental rights to privacy and data protection. The EDPS stated that “certain inspection techniques used by ISPs may indeed be highly privacy-intrusive, especially when they reveal the content of individuals’
+ Internet communications, including emails sent or received, websites visited and files downloaded” 17.
+ In May 2012, after a series of consultations, the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) published its findings regarding traffic management and other practices that lead to restrictions to an open Internet in Europe. The data from the investigation revealed the increasing trend of providers to restrict access to services and applications.
+
+ Pages 17
+ *以下為原第17頁內容，認領人：
+ On 15 October 2012, the European Commission’s latest consultation on Net Neutrality officially ended. On a European level, this was the sixth public consultation on Net Neutrality since Neelie Kroes took office. Only two weeks later, the European Parliament demanded the end of the “wait and see” approach and called “on the Commission to propose legislation to ensure Net Neutrality.” 18
+ A supplementary unofficial consultation was conducted in autumn 2012, when European Member States and the EU institutions were preparing to participate in the World Conference on International Telecommunications 2012 (WCIT12) 19 organised by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). The goal of the conference was a revision of the International Telecommunication Regulations (ITRs), which is a binding international treaty governing telephone, television and radio networks. The European Telecommunications Network Operators’ Association (ETNO) proposed to include global Internet regulation in the ITRs and tabled an amendment that would allow operators to practice differentiated quality of service delivery as well as to establish “sending party pays” business models. 20 This proposal to globally abandon the “end to end” and Net Neutrality principles was not accepted by the European representatives in the process of revision of the ITRs.
+
+ *Page 18/19: Timeline of the Net Neutrality debate in Europe in the last three years.
+ http://www.tiki-toki.com/timeline/entry/108784/Net-neutrality-in-Europe/
+ 201
+
+ *以下為原第18頁內容，認領人：
+ *EVENT
+ NEELIE KROES SAYS:
+ 22 december 2009
+ “We also need to ensure that (...) networks are reliable and resilient, open and neutral”
+ *EVENT
+ NEELIE KROES SAYS:
+ 14 january 2010
+ "(…) that net neutrality is absolutely crucial. On a personal note I put even a heart by this item on my paper! It is of high importance for both of us, the Commission as well, to preserve the open and neutral character of the net."
+ *VIOLATION
+ T-MOBILE BLOCKS SKYPE 3 april 2010
+ Deutsche Telekom, parent company to T-Mobile, has announced that it plans to block access to Skype for iPhone in Germany.
+ *VIOLATION
+ BT THROTTLES BBC IPLAYER
+ 1 june 2010
+ BT Broadband cuts the speed users can watch video services like the BBC iPlayer and YouTube at peak times.
+ *CONSULTATION
+ 1ST EU COMMISSION CONSULTATION LAUNCHED
+ 30rd June 2010
+ *EVENT
+ NEELIE KROES SAYS:
+ 11 november 2010
+ "In the spirit of net neutrality all such content and applications should receive equal treatment.” - "Any content or application that is legal and which does not cause undue congestion or otherwise harm other users or network integrity should be fully accessible."
+ 2011
+ *以下為原第18頁內容，認領人：
+ *VIOLATION
+ KPN ANNOUNCES USE OF DPI
+ 22 april 2011
+ Dutch mobile provider KPN announced plans to charge mobile phone users separate fees for using voice-over-IP (VoIP) services like Skype, instant messaging programs, and streaming video.
+ *VIOLATION
+ FRENCH ISP THROTTLES YOUTUBE
+ 3rd May 2011
+ *EVENT
+ EDPS adopts opinion
+ 7th October 2011
+ In his opinion, the EDPS has made some recommendations which include: the determination of legitimate inspection practices needed to ensure the smooth flow of traffic or carried out for security purposes; the determination of the cases when monitoring requires the users' consent (such as filtering aimed to limit access to certain applications and services, such as peer to peer); and, in such cases, the necessity of guidance regarding the application of the necessary data protection safeguards (purpose limitation, security etc).
+ *CONSULTATION
+ 1ST BEREC CONSULTATION LAUCHED
+ 15th October 2011
+ The BEREC launches a consultation on its guidelines on Net Neutrality and Transparency
+ *EU PARLIAMENT
+ 1ST EU PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION
+ 26 Oktober 2011
+ "Calls further on the Commission to ensure that internet service providers do not block, discriminate against, impair or degrade the ability of any person to use a service to access, use, send, post, receive or offer any content, application or service of their choice, irrespective of source or target;
+ *EVENT
+ NEELIE KROES SAYS:
+ 9th November 2011
+ she heard "allegations that some internet providers throttle, degrade the quality of services"
+ 2012
+ *以下為原第18~19頁內容，認領人：
+ *CONSULTATION
+ 2, 3 & 4 BEREC CONSULTATIONS LAUNCHED
+ 23rd February 2012
+ BEREC launches consultations - three guidelines on Quality of Service (BoR 32), IP-interconnection (BoR 33) and differentiation practices (BoR 31)
+ *VIOLATION
+ EURO WATCHDOG: TELCOS ARE STRANGLING VOIP AND P2P TRAFFIC
+ 15th March 2012
+ *EVENT
+ NETHERLANDS ADOPT LEGISLATION
+ 8th May 2012
+ In reaction to KPN's anti-neutrality plans, a broad majority in the Dutch Parliament voted for a legislative proposal to safeguard an open Internet in The Netherlands.
+ *STUDY
+ BEREC publishes findings
+ 29th May 2012
+ “At least 20% of mobile Internet users in Europe have some form of restriction on their ability to access VoIP services (...)”
+ *CONSULTATION
+ BEREC publishes findings
+ 29th May 2012
+ “At least 20% of mobile Internet users in Europe have some form of restriction on their ability to access VoIP services (...)”
+ *EU PARLIAMENT
+ EU PARLIAMENT DEMANDS NET NEUTRALITY LEGISLATION
+ 26 Oktober 2012
+ "81. Calls on the Commission to propose legislation to ensure net neutrality;"
+ *EU PARLIAMENT
+ EU PARLIAMENT DEMANDS NET NEUTRALITY - AGAIN
+ 15th December 2012
+ EU Parliament demands stronger net neutrality protections - the resolution "Digital Freedom Strategy in EU Foreign Policy”, stresses that the EP "strongly supports the principle of net neutrality, namely that Internet Service Providers do not block, discriminate against, impair or
+ degrade, including through price, the ability of any person to use a service to access, use, send, post, receive or offer any content, application or service of their choice, irrespective of source or target" and "calls on the Commission and Council to promote and preserve high standards of digital freedom in the EU, in particular by
+ codifying the principle of net neutrality.
+ *EVENT
+ SLOVENIA INTRODUCES LEGISLATION
+ 20th December 2012
+ 2013
+ *以下為原第19頁內容，認領人：
+ *VIOLATION
+ ORANGE MAKES GOOGLE PAY FOR TRAFFIC
+ 16th January 2013
+ *VIOLATION
+ VODAFONE BLOCKS VIBER
+ 26th February 2013
+ *STUDY
+ Commission group recommends legislation
+ 23rd January 2013
+ "Channels or mechanisms through which media are delivered to the end user should be entirely neutral in their handling of this content. In the case of digital networks, Net Neutrality and the end-to-end principle
+ should be enshrined within EU law."
+ *EVENT
+ NEELIE KROES SAYS:
+ 20th March 2013
+ "I'm fed up hearing from people who cannot legally access the music and films they love; from artists who can't reach the audiences they want; from scientists who can't properly use modern research techniques."
+ *VIOLATION
+ FRANCE: SFR VIOLATES NET NEUTRALTIY
+ 30th March 2013
+ SFR violates net neutrality by modifying HTML content on internet mobile.
+ *EVENT
+ LEAK: DRAFT REGULATION FOR A "TELECOMS SINGLE MARKET"
+ 11th July 2013
+ The leaked regulation aims, in Article 20, to prohibit anti-competitive blocking and throttling, BUT at the same time it proposes also the exact contrary of guaranteeing net neutrality by explicitly allowing agreements between content and access providers to prioritise traffic.
+ *EVENT
+ NEELIE KROES SAYS:
+ 11th July 2013
+ "So I will guarantee net neutrality. (...)
+ Allowing the new premium services which so many new services rely on"
+ ds: A case study
A case study
- *Ten points to safeguard Net Neutrality
+ *Ten points to
+ Pages 2
+ *以下為原第2頁內容，認領人：
+
+ n 2011, the former Dutch telecoms
+ m nopolist KPN announced plans to
+ m ke users pay extra for data used by
+ c rtain third-party applications, such as
+ W atsApp and Skype, in order to create
+ a advantage for KPN’s own services that
+ i cluded text messaging and phone calls.
+ I May 2011, KPN revealed that it had used
+ D ep Packet Inspection (DPI – see box on
+ p ge 9) technology to identify the use of
+ c rtain applications by its mobile Internet
+ customers 21.
+ One year later, on 8 May 2012, the
+ N therlands adopted crucial legislation to
+ s feguard the open and secure Internet,
+ i cluding Net Neutrality provisions. 22
+ B doing so, the Netherlands is the
+ f rst country in Europe and the second
+ c untry in the world to enshrine the
+ p inciple of Net Neutrality in law. This
+ d monstrates that it is possible to draft
+ N t Neutrality legislation that takes into
+ a count the interests of Internet users,
+ s rvice providers and telecommunication
+ c mpanies, while ensuring freedom of
+ e pression and privacy on the Internet.
+ The law aims to maximise choice and
+ f eedom of expression on the Internet.
+ I therefore prohibits the hindering or
+ d srupting of services or applications on
+ t e Internet. Only in certain limited cases
+ w ere this is necessary is an exception to
+ t is principle allowed. Those exceptions
+ m st be interpreted narrowly, whereby
+ t e assessment of the necessity must be
+ b sed on the criteria of proportionality,
+ u ing criteria established in the context of
+ t e application of the European Convention
+ o Human Rights.
+
+ Pages 20~21
+ *以下為原第20~21頁內容，認領人：
+ The first exception aims to ensure that in case of congestion, time-sensitive traffic (such as VoIP) can be prioritised, and that in such cases other traffic may be delayed. Providers should avoid congestion in the first place by adequate investment in capacity. However, if there is congestion, then the measures under this exemption are designed to facilitate end-users’ ability to continue to have maximum access to information, disseminate information
+ and use applications or services. The measures should be removed as soon as possible.
+ The second exception is aimed at blocking traffic that affects the safety or integrity of the network or of the end-user’s terminal device. This can, for example, be traffic from computers that are part of a botnet and which is used for a distributed denial of service attack. A measure must be proportionate and therefore must be restricted to only the traffic that affects security or integrity, and should be used no longer than necessary.
+ The third exception is designed to make it possible to block unsolicited commercial communications such as spam.
+ Finally, an exception allows for the situation where providers are required by statute to hinder or slow down certain traffic, or are required to do so under a court order.
+ In addition, providers of Internet access services are not allowed to make the price of Internet access services dependent on the services and applications which are offered or used by customers.
+
+ “As much as anything else, the economic success of the Internet comes from its architecture.”
+ - Lawrence Lessig, Harvard Law School Professor 23safeguard Net Neutrality
*Glossary ()/2
- Page 23
+ P
+ Pages 22
+ *以下為原第22頁內容，認領人：
+ *The Internet must be kept neutral and open.
+ *Accessibility between all endpoints connected to the Internet without any form of restriction must continue to be upheld.
+ *All forms of discriminatory traffic management, such as blocking or throttling should be prohibited, unless as part of objectively necessary traffic management measures.
+ *Traffic management should only be allowed as a narrowly targeted deviation from the rule. It must be either necessary, proportionate and legally required, or required to address a transient network management problem which cannot be dealt with otherwise.
+ *Legal clarity must be established to determine what types of traffic management are legitimate under which circumstances.
+ *Access providers have to indicate in their contracts and advertisements a guaranteed minimum bandwidth, maximum latency and quality measures for the connection (so that customers can determine whether a particular connection can e.g. be used with Skype). Access providers have to provide tools to verify those standards. These standards must be determined with a statistical method that has to be published.
+ *We need to establish a clear set of obligations for access providers regarding the neutrality and best effort of the Internet broadband services on the one hand, and for specialised services that are not transported via the Internet on the other.
+ *By default, only header information should be used for traffic management. The use of deep packet inspection (DPI) should be reviewed by national Data Protection Authorities (DPAs) to assess compliance with the EU’s data protection and fundamental rights framework.
+ *End-users should be able to report violations of the points above to an authority defined by the government. This authority must have the necessary resources to enforce the above conditions.
+ *EU-wide legislation on Net Neutrality should provide for financial sanctions with a sufficient dissuasive effect.age 23
*以下為原第23頁內容，認領人：
Best effort The Internet operates on a “best effort” basis in contrast to the telecoms world’s end-to-end voice circuit with a guaranteed Quality of Service.
（4 行未修改）
IP (Internet Protocol) IP is a communications standard that allows computers to send data packets to one another. IP is the basic communication technology of the Internet.
IP address An IP address is a numerical address that is assigned to every device connected to the Internet (check our booklet “How the Internet Works”). As household or business routers will often display just one IP address for all of the people connected to it, the IP address can identify a group of people rather than just one individual.
+
Page 24
*以下為原第24頁內容，認領人：
（11 行未修改）
Traffic management ISPs have always engaged applied mechanisms to control traffic flows to preserve the security of the network or to avoid congestion. If ISPs engage in supplementary practices (in addition to the existing congestion control by TCP/IP) to inspect and to differentiate traffic, this is often referred to as “traffic management”.
VoIP (Voice over IP) A set of data communications protocols and technologies to enable voice to be sent over the Internet or over separate, IP-based networks.
+
*Note
*附註，要不要翻請大家提供意見。
（18 行未修改）
type=REPORT&reference=A7-2012-0341&language=EN
11 PLUM study 2011 http://skypeblogs.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/plum_october2011_the_open_
- internet_-_a_platform_for_growth.pdf
+ internet_-_a_plaform_for_growth.pdf
12 Joint Statement of the EU Delegation to the 7th International Governance Forum (IGF) in Baku
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-852_en.htm
（20 行未修改）
|
||
| 2014-01-01 06:11 – 06:11 | r2 – r7 | |
顯示 diff（32 行未修改）
A case study
*Ten points to safeguard Net Neutrality
- *Glossary
+ *Glossary ()/2
Page 23
*以下為原第23頁內容，認領人：
（67 行未修改）
|
||
| 2013-12-30 13:20 – 13:20 | r0 – r1 | |
顯示 diff+ 網路中立性 Net Neutrality
+
+ *！！！尚未貼完，請勿開始！！！
+ *說明：此為共筆翻譯網路中立性文件的工作頁面，校稿完成後將公佈於相關專頁／網站，有興趣參與的各位，請自行於認領人填上暱稱／ID，並直接於原文上方進行翻譯即可。
+ *也請能幫忙翻譯的各位在此處統一簽名：nchild
+
+ 來源：歐洲數位權利（European Digital Right, ERDi）文件08 2013.11.05 出版
+ 授權方式：創用CC 姓名標示-非商業性-相同方式分享3.0（CC BY-NC-SA 3.0）
+
+ *以下為前言與引言，認領人：
+ Net Neutrality is the principle that every point on the network can connect to any other point on the network, without discrimination on the basis of origin, destination or type of data.
+ This principle is the central reason for the success of the Internet. Net Neutrality is crucial
+ for innovation, competition and for the free flow of information. Most importantly, Net Neutrality gives the Internet its ability to generate new means of exercising civil rights such as the freedom of expression and the right to receive and impart information.
+ In this booklet, we will explain Net Neutrality, why it is important, why certain Internet access providers believe that they have an interest in violating it, and we will address common misconceptions
+
+ “Allowing broadband carriers to control what people see and do online would fundamentally
+ undermine the principles that have made the Internet such a success”.
+ - Vint Cerf, founding father of the Internet 01
+
+ *認領人：
+ *What is Net Neutrality?
+ FREEDOM OF communication IN THE DIGITAL ERA
+
+ *認領人：
+ *Why is Net Neutrality violated?
+ THE THREE MAIN REASONS
+ *10 Reasons for Net Neutrality
+ *Myths & Truths
+ *The situation in the European Union
+ Waiting for net neutrality
+ *The Netherlands: A case study
+ A case study
+ *Ten points to safeguard Net Neutrality
+ *Glossary
+ Page 23
+ *以下為原第23頁內容，認領人：
+ Best effort The Internet operates on a “best effort” basis in contrast to the telecoms world’s end-to-end voice circuit with a guaranteed Quality of Service.
+ This is because data traffic is often short and bursty and the overhead involved in trying to reserve resources in advance for such traffic would often be wildly excessive. In addition, there are simply too many networks involved in the Internet to allow all the direct contractual relationships that would be needed for generalised QoS. See also peering.
+ DOCSIS DOCSIS is an international telecommunications standard that permits the addition of high-speed data transfer to an existing cable TV system.
+ End-to-end principle The end-to-end principle is part of the Internet’s core architecture. This principle asserts that Internet communications should be controlled at its endpoints rather than by intermediaries. The “transmission pipe” does not discriminate against the sender, recipient or content of the data transmitted over the network.
+ Filtering The act of blocking specific packets of data when they travel through networks based on pre-defined criteria. It can be used as a technique to implement security firewalls but also to censor communications.
+ IP (Internet Protocol) IP is a communications standard that allows computers to send data packets to one another. IP is the basic communication technology of the Internet.
+ IP address An IP address is a numerical address that is assigned to every device connected to the Internet (check our booklet “How the Internet Works”). As household or business routers will often display just one IP address for all of the people connected to it, the IP address can identify a group of people rather than just one individual.
+ Page 24
+ *以下為原第24頁內容，認領人：
+ Internet access provider An access provider is a company that offers access to the Internet, that operate fixed/mobile infrastructure or provide access to infrastructure.
+ ISP (Internet Service Provider) ISP is the general term for companies or organisations that provide access to the Internet and related services.
+ There are different types of ISPs, such as access, hosting, virtual and transit providers.
+ Peering Many networks on the Internet swap traffic with their peers without payment. This is a sophisticated response to a complex environment. Accounting and billing and even negotiating the contracts in the first place involve costs for any organisation. At its simplest, your access provider’s network is paid for by its subscribers. It may then buy bulk transit to access the rest of the Internet. But if it can then simply swap traffic with its peers then this can be win-win for all concerned. It would be illogical to pay your peer when they will just have to pay you back - and in addition you would both need to assume the costs of all the overheads of such an arrangement.
+ Peer to peer (P2P) A decentralised system where the end-users (“peers”) are connected directly with each other via the Internet.
+ Throttling Throttling means the intentional slowing down of services, applications or content by an Internet access provider.
+ Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) TCP is the protocol responsible for
+ verifying the correct delivery of data and keeping track of data packets. TCP
+ helps to detect errors and to trigger retransmission until the packets are
+ correctly and completely received.
+ TCP/IP architecture TCP and IP are the most common as well as the oldest standards for Internet communication. As most transmissions of data across the Internet take place using TCP on top of IP, the name TCP/IP has come to represent the complete suite of protocols used on the Internet. These protocols define the rules that computers must follow in order to communicate with each other and send data to the right destination.
+ Traffic management ISPs have always engaged applied mechanisms to control traffic flows to preserve the security of the network or to avoid congestion. If ISPs engage in supplementary practices (in addition to the existing congestion control by TCP/IP) to inspect and to differentiate traffic, this is often referred to as “traffic management”.
+ VoIP (Voice over IP) A set of data communications protocols and technologies to enable voice to be sent over the Internet or over separate, IP-based networks.
+ *Note
+ *附註，要不要翻請大家提供意見。
+ 01 http://www.commerce.senate.gov/pdf/cerf-020706.pdf
+ 02 EDRi booklet: How the Internet works http://www.edri.org/files/2012EDRiPapers/how_the_
+ internet_works.pdf
+ 03 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-08-473_en.htm
+ 04 Open Rights Group: http://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2012/peace-advocates-blocked-as-porn
+ 05 BBC: Virgin defends file-sharing campaign http://news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/technology/
+ newsid_7486000/7486836.stm and Virgin Media and Cview to rifle through your packets: http://
+ crave.cnet.co.uk/software/virgin-media-and-cview-to-rifle-through-your-packets-49304424/
+ 06 Open Net Initiative, West Censoring East https://opennet.net/west-censoring-east-the-usewestern-
+ technologies-middle-east-censors-2010-2011
+ 07 Wired, The Kremlin’s New Internet Surveillance Plan, 1 November 2012: http://www.wired.com/
+ dangerroom/2012/11/russia-surveillance/all/
+ 08 Thomas Grob, Deutsche Telekom, at the Netz-für-alle-Konferenz: https://www.youtube.com/
+ watch?v=HQbwiZ5hIoo#t=20m28s
+ 09 BEREC report on traffic management, 2012: “When blocking/throttling is implemented in the
+ network, it is typically done through deep packet inspection (DPI)” https://ec.europa.eu/digitalagenda/
+ sites/digital-agenda/files/Traffic%20Management%20Investigation%20BEREC_2.pdf
+ 10 European Parliament resolution, 26/10/2012 http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?
+ type=REPORT&reference=A7-2012-0341&language=EN
+ 11 PLUM study 2011 http://skypeblogs.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/plum_october2011_the_open_
+ internet_-_a_platform_for_growth.pdf
+ 12 Joint Statement of the EU Delegation to the 7th International Governance Forum (IGF) in Baku
+ http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-852_en.htm
+ 13 Glasnost data visualised in a Net Neutrality map http://netneutralitymap.org/
+ 14 Respect my net: http://respectmynet.eu/list/
+ 15 Directive 2002/19/19 (Access Directive):
+ http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32002L0019:EN:HTML
+ 16 See BEREC study May 2012 http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/sites/digital-agenda/files/
+ Traffic%20Management%20Investigation%20BEREC_2.pdf
+ 17 EDPS Opinion on Net Neutrality, traffic management and the protection of privacy https://
+ secure.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/webdav/site/mySite/shared/Documents/EDPS/PressNews/
+ Press/2011/EDPS-2011-10-Net-neutrality_EN.pdf
+ 18 EU Parliament resolution on completing the Digital Single Market, 26 October 2012: http://www.
+ europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&reference=A7-2012-0341&language=EN
+ 19 See WCIT resources: http://wcitleaks.org/resources/
+ 20 ENDitorial: The ETNO’s WCIT Proposals are not as bad as some say http://www.edri.org/edrigram/
+ number10.19/wcit-etno-proposals-not-so-bad
+ 21 Web wereld: KPN luistert abonnees af met Deep Packet Inspection http://webwereld.nl/
+ beveiliging/53691-kpn-luistert-abonnees-af-met-deep-packet-inspection
+ 22 The translated provisions can be found on the website of Bits of Freedom:
+ https://www.bof.nl/2011/06/27/translations-of-key-dutch-internet-freedom-provisions/
+ 23 http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2010/8/9/who-gets-priority-on-the-web/a-deregulationdebacle-
+ for-the-internet
|
||