“One company is conspicuously absent from the net neutrality debate: Apple,” Thom Holwerda writes for OSNews. “The Cupertino giant is usually all too eager to ride the waves of what in American political parlance are called ‘liberal’ causes, so its absence from the fight for net neutrality may seem surprising. In reality, though, Apple’s absence makes a lot of sense: Apple does not benefit from net neutrality.”
“Apple has never openly supported net neutrality,” Holwerda writes. “Back in 2014, Apple was not among the 100 companies that signed the open letter in support of net neutrality, and it’s not a member of the Internet Association, the industry group behind the Day of Action which lobbies for net neutrality.”
“Tim Cook didn’t so much as tweet about the Day of Action,” Holwerda writes. “The only instance of Apple saying anything about net neutrality was in February 2017, in response to a question during a shareholders meeting. Finally, Tim Cook responded to a question about the Trump administration’s position against Net Neutrality, which seemed to catch the executive off guard. While Apple has been vocal about a number of policies from the new president’s office, Cook downplayed his response here: ‘We stay out of politics but stay in policy. If Net Neutrality became a top thing, we would definitely engage in it.'”
Holwerda writes, “Unless Apple breaks its silence and finally openly, unequivocally, and determinedly supports net neutrality, the safe, capitalist, and historically informed assumption is that Apple does not want net neutrality, because it would limit their ability to buy preferential treatment from carriers and ISPs.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: “Net Neutrality” in concept is much different than so-called “net neutrality” selectively imposed. Delve into the nitty gritty of so-called “net neutrality” and it’s not so “neutral” after all. As with most everything governmental, the fight is for who gets to control so-called “net neutrality” and who is subject to/gets exempted from said control, not how/whether/if it works for the end user.
As we wrote back in August 2006:
We don’t presume to know the best way to get there, but we support the concept of “Net Neutrality” especially as it pertains to preventing the idea of ISP’s blocking or otherwise impeding sites that don’t pay the ISP to ensure equal access. That said, we usually prefer the government to be hands-off wherever possible, Laissez-faire, except in cases where the free market obviously cannot adequately self-regulate (antitrust, for example). Regulations are static and the marketplace is fluid, so such regulation can often have unintended, unforeseen results down the road. We sincerely hope that there are enough forces in place and/or that the balances adjust in such a manner as to keep the ‘Net as neutral as it is today.
And as we followed up in September 2009:
That we have the same Take over three years later should be telling. Government regulations are not a panacea, neither are the lack thereof. It’s all about striking a proper balance where innovation can thrive while abuses are prevented.
Make that “the same Take over a decade later.”
SEE ALSO:
FCC kicks off effort to roll back so-called ‘net neutrality’ rules – May 18, 2017
FCC Chairman Ajit Pai explains why he wants to scrap so-called ‘net neutrality’ rules – April 28, 2017
FCC Chief Ajit Pai develops plans to roll back so-called ‘net neutrality’ rules – April 7, 2017
U.S. FCC chairman wields weed whacker, takes first steps against so-called ‘net neutrality’ – February 3, 2017
How so-called ‘net neutrality’ will fare under President Trump – January 26, 2017
New FCC chairman Ajit Pai vows to take a ‘weed whacker’ to so-called ‘net neutrality’ – January 24, 2017
President Trump elevates Ajit Pai to FCC Chairman – January 23, 2017
Outgoing FCC chief Tom Wheeler offers final defense of so-called ‘net neutrality’ – January 13, 2017
Under President Trump, Obama ally Google may face policy setbacks, including roll back of so-called ‘net neutrality’ rules – November 18, 2016
Jeb Bush on FCC and so-called ‘net neutrality’ regulation: ‘One of the craziest ideas I’ve ever heard’ – March 8, 2015
Who loves the FCC’s overreach on so-called ‘net neutrality?’ Telecom lawyers – March 5, 2015
Legal battles loom over FCC’s so-called ‘net neutrality’ rules – February 26, 2015
U.S. FCC OKs so-called ‘net neutrality’ rules on party-line vote – February 26, 2015
U.S. FCC’s rules for so-called ‘net neutrality’ expected to unleash slew of court challenges – February 26, 2015
EFF: ‘We are deeply concerned; FCC’s new rules include provision that sounds like a recipe for overreach’ – February 25, 2015
The U.S. FCC’s Orwellian Internet policy – February 25, 2015
Democratic FCC commissioner balks at so-called ‘net neutrality’ rules – February 24, 2015
FCC chief pressed to release proposed regulations governing so-called ‘net neutrality’ – February 23, 2015
FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai: Obama’s plan a monumental shift toward government control of the Internet – February 10, 2015
Congress launches investigation as Republicans claim Obama had ‘improper influence’ over so-called ‘net neutrality’ – February 7, 2015
FCC chairman proposes to regulate ISP’s under Title II – February 4, 2015
U.S. congressional Republicans’ bill aims to head off Obama’s so-called ‘net neutrality’ plan – January 17, 2015
U.S. Congressional proposal offers Internet rules of the road – January 15, 2015
U.S. FCC says it will vote on so-called ‘net neutrality’ in February – January 3, 2015
FCC hopes its rules for so-called ‘net neutrality’ survive inevitable litigation – November 22, 2014
Obama-appointed FCC chairman distances himself from Obama on so-called ‘net neutrality’ – November 12, 2014
What does so-called ‘net neutrality’ mean for Apple? – November 12, 2014
AT&T to pause fiber investment until net neutrality rules are decided – November 12, 2014
There’s no one to root for in the debate over so-called ‘net neutrality’ – November 11, 2014
U.S. FCC plays Russian Roulette with so-called ‘net neutrality’ – November 11, 2014
U.S. House Speaker John Boehner: Republicans will continue efforts to stop misguided scheme to regulate the Internet – November 10, 2014
Tech Freedom: Obama cynically exploits confusion over Title II, misses opportunity to lead on legislative deal – November 10, 2014
Obama want FCC to regulate the Internet; Cruz calls it ‘Obamacare for the Internet’ – November 10, 2014
I don’t automatically support anything the EFF says, but I find they pay attention to important parts of the argument and I know they’re not in the pocket of any vested ISP or giant media company interest, so I suggest this article is worth your time:
Net Neutrality Won’t Save Us if DRM is Baked Into the Web:
The Internet’s users care about an open playing field and don’t want a handful of companies to decide what we can and can’t do online.
Today, however, we should also think about other ways in which small numbers of companies, including net neutrality’s biggest foes, are trying to gain the same kinds of control, with the same grave consequences for the open web. Exhibit A is baking digital rights management (DRM) into the web’s standards.
WWWC has signed off on browser DRM. Sir Tim Berners-Lee supports it.
Much as I’d like Apple to support REAL Net Neutrality, Apple DID have its say on the subject. They apparently decided not to go public with whatever is their perspective on the subject:
FCC Chairman Pai met with Apple, Facebook and others to discuss net neutrality and other debates to come
The tech industry is nervous about Pai’s potential plans to scrap his predecessor’s open internet rules.
Meanwhile:
If FCC gets its way, we’ll lose a lot more than net neutrality
Beyond no-blocking rules, Title II plays big role in overall consumer protection.
…Title II provisions related to broadband network construction, universal service, competition, network interconnection, and Internet access for disabled people would no longer apply. Rules requiring disclosure of hidden fees and data caps could be overturned, and the FCC would relinquish its role in evaluating whether ISPs can charge competitors for data cap exemptions….
IOW: Corporatocracy. Parasitism of customers. Anti-capitalism. Anti-democracy.
Yep. And Apple, the biggest richest most successful corporation of them all, is acting like the typical soulless money grabber they have become. End user choice, prompt hardware improvements, privacy, and so forth are all subjugated to low priority as the big brother cloud of subscription based computing is pushed onto users. Apple is after a guaranteed slice of the pie and will happily let the internet turn from on open road network into a constrained blockade of expensive corporate toll roads as long as it improved their profits. That’s why what Pai is offering.
Instead of gay pride events, you would think a company with a conscience like apple used to be would stand up against any internet restrictions.
…acting like the typical soulless money grabber they have become.
If that’s the case, consider me profoundly sad.
Right now I’m in a rhetorical battle with a company I used to admire: Agilebit, the developers of 1Password. From my point of view, they lost their soul in March when they pulled all reference to their single standard user version of 1Password and instead marketing moronically decides to screw over (IMHO) potential customers by hiding this option on their website. When I inquired about their deletion of this option, they told me it was still available and to go to their website to obtain it. Except it’s not there at all. They’re lying to the public in order to push an option of a monthly fee for 1Password that the customer my prefer to NOT have. I’ve lost respect for them.
The above is a recent example of a company that gave up actual capitalism and went for parasitism instead. (That’s of course my personal interpretation of this stupid nonsense).
If Apple pulls this sort of crap, I call them out. If indeed Apple is caving to a corporate controlled Internet, for whatever reason, I’ll of course got on the rant-page about it. I know exactly what the Pai-for-brains is attempting. It’s the same old anti-democratic corporatocracy we’ve had foisted at us by BOTH Democrats AND Republicans of late.
IOW: YES, Apple should of course be standing up for Real Net Neutrality. There should be no question about their stance. If Apple is still the champion of user-friendliness, here’s a brilliant chance to prove it. A corporatocracy run Internet will be the definition of user-HOSTILE.
Thanks for the sensible critique. Me & my neighbor were just preparing to do a little research on this. We got a grab a book from our area library but I think I learned more clear from this post. I am very glad to see such fantastic info being shared freely out there.