
Net neutrality in the EU is only a few amendments away - sbnnrd
https://savetheinternet.eu/
======
Silhouette
If anyone from the EU does want to take action on this, please remember to
contact _your own_ MEPs. This site seems to be advocating calling an MEP at
random, or calling any MEP from your own country, but most elected
representatives will (and often by convention must) ignore representations
from anyone who isn't in their constituency.

Your own representatives should at least acknowledge your communication, and
in my experience you'll tend to get a mixed bag with MEPs where some will
actually reply substantively but others mostly won't. Please remember to vote
accordingly at the next elections as well, because often the MEP elections are
considered second tier and don't get as much turn-out even though the elected
MEPs wind up having a say on important issues like this one.

~~~
dogma1138
MEP as far as i know are a single national constituency, there aren't
districts through which they are elected. So you can pretty much call any MEP
in the EU country you live and vote for the EUP in regardless of your
nationality.

The "good" thing about the EUP is that it's so powerless that there is very
little lobbying which means that MEP's tend to me much more ideological and
open to input from anyone rather than their donors and lobby groups.

EDIT: Apparently the constituency segmentation can vary between country and
country some use a single constituency some use sub-national segmentation that
may or not be in line with local or national elections.

~~~
Silhouette
It depends on the country you're in. For some EU states the MEPs are elected
as a single group. For others there are constituencies within the state and
the state's overall group of MEPs is composed of several smaller groups. So
what you say is true in some states, but not in others.

Also, MEPs have considerably more practical power since the Lisbon Treaty.

------
Qantourisc
I must be missing something. I from the resources I read I didn't find an
indication that these laws mandate that traffic prioritization is must
allowed. As I gather they just don't specifically forbid prioritization.

If I'm wrong please reply. Not having a law that mandates true net neutrality
is a shame. Having a law that forbids net neutrality is a totally different
matter !

~~~
PythonicAlpha
As much I know, you are right.

But you also must see, that when something (so profitable) is allowed, than it
will be used. Such a loophole was long time awaited by the internet providers.
They _want_ a legal loophole, so they can better sell their services.

I guess, they are already in the starting blocks to sell "better services" to
the highest paying bidder. How this will end and if the nightmares will come
true, nobody can say.

------
amluto
The "ban zero rating" thing bothers me. I think that zero rating is a great
idea if applied fairly. An ISP should be allowed to sell zero rated traffic at
a fixed and publicly advertised price, using openly documented protocols, and
free of onerous requirements or contracts, as long as any person or company
can use it.

It's only zero rating for preferred providers under unfair or secretive terms
that's problematic.

------
Paul_S
If you want to save the internet get involved with mesh networks. Emailing or
tweeting your politicians is easy to do but pointless.

~~~
danieldk
Back when the industry tried to push a unified software patentent bill in
Europe, I wrote personal (non-stock) e-mails to some members of the EP. Nearly
all of them gave non-stock answers and were interested in the arguments that I
provided against patents.

Many politicians are willing to listen to their voters, especially if it not a
stock e-mail, carefully written, and not rude or threatening (which
unfortunately seems to be the norm today).

~~~
sandstrom
I have the same experience. I've personally emailed with [and gotten replies
back from] both MPs[1] as well as one member of the EU Commission. I should
note that it was replies from them, not their secretaries/letter-writers.

Subject was software patents and the TTIP and I spent about ~30 minutes
writing an email (succinct, sound arguments, references, etc; an angry rant
probably won't get a reply).

[1] Member of the European Parliament

------
sebastianconcpt
How people generally think of this regulation? Like something
positive/desirable or something dangerous?

~~~
PythonicAlpha
The whole regulation was undermined from the beginning by financial interests
of big corporations and internet providers.

No wonder, when you see, which politicians are in charge.

The EU -- I must regretful say -- is just a dumping place for those
politicians, that did already prove in their own country that they are
incompetent.

The whole EU is just an invitation for lobbyists to get more pleasant
regulations.

In our country, the politicians always say: "Oh, we don't like that
regulation, but we have to put it in action, because it comes from the EU" \--
of course they say that even, when their own party or even when they
themselves have pressured the EU to bring this regulation on it's way. The EU
is just a big black box, where any stupid and unwanted (from the voters side)
regulation can be brought threw, without putting votes at risk. A perfect
system for politicians like we have in Germany, that give themselves a pretty
looks, but in reality they just give a sh*t for their own voters. No wonder,
we only have such puppets left in Berlin. But maybe, every nation just gets
the politicians, it deserves.

~~~
funkyy
>The EU -- I must regretful say -- is just a dumping place for those
politicians, that did prove in their own land that they are incompetent.

Not really. EU is mostly dumping place for dangerous politicians. Ones that
are to ambitious or can destroy status quo of current system. When prime
minister is afraid of a strong independent person he sends him to the EU.

Also the ones that did something as a favor like taking blame for something or
pushing proper rules through the voting and getting EU sit as an award.

So EU parliament is mix really, not just dumping ground.

~~~
PythonicAlpha
Maybe. I just can speak from those politicians, I saw going there. There are
some very incompetent instances in between. I can not see, how they (which I
know) could be dangerous -- in spite being dangerous for the whole EU because
of their decisions in Brussels.

It also seems, that many politicians just see the EU as a way to get much
money very fast. The best idea is, just to cater the interests of the
lobbyists.

But maybe the real problem is, that we only have incompetent politicians left.
When I see, how the Germans stick to the "most competent women-leader" we have
... it is a disgrace.

Today, leadership in politics in reality seems to mean: Don't do anything at
all and wait, until "the market" will do it right. How anybody could trust
such leaders, that never solve a problem, but just shift things into the
future (ultimately making the troubles worse) is just beyond me.

------
ZoeZoeBee
Is that a good or bad thing in the OPs view?

There are always unintended consequences to legislation

