M$ Monitor: Why You Haven't Heard From Us

[Audrie Krause <audrie@netaction.org>]

The Micro$oft Monitor
$ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ -----  $ ----- $
Published by NetAction          Issue No. 40                 July 29, 1999

Repost where appropriate. Copyright and subscription info at end of message.
* * * * * * *
In This Issue:
Why You Haven't Heard From Us
Bring Us Broadband
About the Micro$oft Monitor
$ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ -----  $ ----- $

Why You Haven't Heard From Us

When NetAction launched the Consumer Choice Campaign in May of 1997, our
goal was to focus attention on Microsoft's growing monopolization of the
Internet.  At that time, we were filling an unmet need within the activist
community.  Ralph Nader and Jamie Love at the Consumer Project on
Technology were just beginning to plan their first Microsoft conference.
No other organizations were working to mobilize Internet users to speak up
about their concerns.  NetAction filled that gap by publishing the
Micro$oft Monitor, conducting and distributing surveys, and researching and
publishing white papers.

But we haven't published an issue of the Micro$oft Monitor since last
March, and I'm sure that some of you may be wondering why.  The reason is
simple: we are moving on to other issues and will no longer be monitoring
developments in the Microsoft antitrust case.  As many of NetAction's
supporters and colleagues know, our resources are limited,  Most of what we
are able to accomplish is done by volunteers.  Although this will be our
last formal communication to the Micro$oft Monitor mailing list, we plan to
maintain the list on inactive status in the event we are able to resume
work on this issue in the future.

Before saying goodbye, I want to acknowledge and thank some of the
individuals who have helped NetAction on this project, and express my
appreciation to all the Internet users who have provided support -- both
moral and financial -- for our efforts on this issue.  I'm truly pleased
that NetAction was able to play a small role in putting this issue on the
public interest agenda.

Most importantly, I want to thank Jim Warren, who serves on NetAction's
Advisory Board, for pointing out the need to organize Internet users to
speak up about Microsoft's anticompetitive activities, and Jamie Love of
the Consumer Project on Technology, for encouraging me to go forward with
this effort.   Advisory Board members Judi Clark and Glenn Manishin also
deserve special thanks for the substantive advice and assistance they
provided, as do Nathan Newman, project director for the Consumer Choice
Campaign, and Mitch Stoltz, our volunteer intern.  Many others, including
people I've never met face-to-face, are also to be thanked for their
assistance and support.

Before signing off, I want to alert you to the new project we are
launching, to educate and mobilize internet users around the need for
competitive deployment of high-speed Internet access.  The following
article, which is also published in NetAction Notes, describes this
initiative.  We hope you will support this new campaign.
$ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ -----  $ ----- $

Bring Us Broadband

A high-stakes debate is taking place in communities throughout the United
States, and the outcome will determine how soon -- and under what
conditions -- high-speed Internet access is offered via broadband cable.
NetAction is launching a campaign <http://www.netaction.org/broadband/> to
educate consumers about the advantages of competitive deployment of
high-speed Internet access.

On one side of the debate is AT&T, which until 1984 was the nation's
monopoly telephone company, and still controls more than half of the long
distance market.  On the other side is America Online (AOL), the nation's
largest Internet service provider, allied with GTE and the Regional Bell
Operating Companies.  AOL is also financing No Gatekeepers, a coalition of
consumer groups backing AOL's position.

As a longtime consumer advocate, I've seen my share of corporate posturing,
but the unholy alliance of AOL, GTE, and the Bells raises hypocrisy to new
heights.  Under the guise of a call for "open access," these companies have
launched a massive lobbying campaign to convince federal, state and local
officials, as well as consumers, that AT&T should be forced to provide its
competitors with access to the broadband cable network it is spending over
$100 billion to deploy.  In essence, AT&T's competitors want to benefit
from the company's investment without risking their own capital.

It's a sweet deal for AT&T's competitors.  And by couching this lobbying
effort as a call for "open access," AOL and its allies have managed to
convince a few local officials and consumer groups that it's also good for
consumers. Nothing could be further from the truth.

GTE and the Bells are the very same companies that have maintained monopoly
control of local phone service by using every regulatory and legal trick in
the book to avoid opening their own networks to competitors - as they were
mandated to do three years ago when Congress enacted the Telecommunications
Act of 1996.

And AOL is the company that recently declared its millions of customers
"off limits" to instant messaging via software provided by companies other
than AOL.  If that's an example of AOL's commitment to "open access,"
consumers have good reason to be worried.

That's why Internet users who want competitive choices in high-speed
Internet access should support the "hands off" approach to Internet
regulation that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has used for
nearly 30 years.  As a recent FCC Working Paper pointed out, this "hands
off" approach is working. See:
<http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/OPP/working_papers/oppwp31.pdf>.

The Bells and GTE have for years had the technical ability to offer
high-speed Internet access over the phone network via digital subscriber
line (DSL) service. But they didn't start offering their own high-speed
Internet service until competition began to emerge via broadband cable
modems.  Then, when competition finally developed, the telcos enlisted
AOL's help in demanding that government regulate the new technology. This
is nothing more than a ploy to slow down competition for both Internet
access and local phone service.

NetAction does not believe regulation is necessary to ensure that consumers
have choices in high-speed Internet access.  Wireless technology is being
developed, and competition from cable broadband is already motivating local
phone companies to offer DSL service at competitive prices.  The "forced
access" being advocated by AOL, GTE, and the Bells will simply delay
competition and effectively deny consumers the benefits Congress promised
when it passed the Telecommunications Act of 1996.

That's why NetAction is launching Bring Us Broadband, an Internet outreach
campaign to educate consumers about the advantages of competitive
deployment of high-speed Internet access, and alert consumers to
opportunities to speak out against proposals to regulate access to cable
broadband that threaten to delay the introduction of competitive high-speed
Internet service.

The Bring Us Broadband campaign, at: <http://www.netaction.org/broadband/>,
includes background on the issue, information on how to speak up, and links
to other resources.  We are also inviting Internet users to subscribe to a
new email alert list, Broadband Briefings.  Subscribers will be alerted to
opportunities to speak out before local, state, and federal officials as
they consider this issue.

To subscribe to Broadband Briefings:

	Send an email message to: 	majordomo@netaction.org

	In the message body, type: 	subscribe broadband
$ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ -----  $ ----- $

About The Micro$oft Monitor

The Micro$oft Monitor is a free electronic newsletter, published as part of
the Consumer Choice Campaign <http://www.netaction.org/msoft/>.  Back
issues are archived at: <http://www.netaction.org/monitor/>.  NetAction is
a national, non-profit organization dedicated to educating the public,
policy makers, and the media about technology-based social and political
issues, and to teaching activists how to use the Internet for organizing,
outreach, and advocacy.

For more information about NetAction, contact Audrie Krause,
by phone: (415) 775-8674, by E-mail: <mailto:audrie@netaction.org>,
visit the NetAction Web site at: <http://www.netaction.org>, or write to:
NetAction * 601 Van Ness Ave., No. 631 * San Francisco, CA 94102

To learn more about how activists can use the Internet for grassroots
organizing, outreach, and advocacy, subscribe to NetAction Notes, a free
electronic newsletter published twice a month.

To subscribe to NetAction Notes, send a message to: <majordomo@netaction.org>
The body of the message should state: <subscribe netaction>.  To unsubscribe
at any time, send a message to: <majordomo@netaction.org>.  The body of the
message should state: <unsubscribe netaction>.
$ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ ----- $ -----  $ ----- $

Copyright 1999 by NetAction/The Tides Center.  All rights reserved.
Material may be reposted or reproduced for non-commercial use provided
NetAction is cited as the source.  NetAction is a project of The Tides
Center, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization.