Tuesday, 27 October 2015

The European parliament will take a key vote on Tuesday on rules affecting how internet traffic is managed.

EU parliament set to vote on net neutrality rules

The European Parliament buildingImage copyrightGetty Images
The European parliament will take a key vote on Tuesday on rules affecting how internet traffic is managed.
MEPs are considering a new set of rules for telecoms companies inside the EU.
The plan could have major implications for net neutrality, where traffic is not slowed down or priced differently because of its content or origin.
Some people fear the plan may lead to such restrictions but others argue that first it would have to be turned into specific regulations.
Some tech companies, campaign groups and the inventor of the web Sir Tim Berners-Lee have all called for the adoption of amendments to the rules, which they believe would better safeguard the principles of net neutrality.
However, this would mean rejecting the plan in a form to which EU governments have already agreed.
Another part of the legislation, which would abolish mobile roaming charges within the EU, is popular with MEPs, so enthusiasm for rejecting it in its current form and further delaying this move is low, according to some analysts.
What is net neutrality?
The idea that data should be ferried from place to place as quickly as possible, regardless of what it is, is how most people assume the internet works.
That's the essence of net neutrality.
However, it's possible to decide to prioritise certain types of data over others - perhaps, for example, by charging the producers of such data a fee to make sure their content gets delivered promptly.
For big video streaming sites, the prospect is worrying. They could find themselves coughing up lots of money in fees simply to give their users the same experience as before.
Some argue, however, that such fees are fair since it costs internet service providers a lot of money to keep providing such content, no matter how popular the streaming sites become.
An overall majority of MEPs will be required for the amendments to passImage copyrightGetty Images
Image captionAn overall majority of MEPs will be required for the amendments to pass
What are MEPs voting on?
The plan that members are actually voting on is a proposed set of amendments to the rules governing telecoms companies that work inside the EU.
If they decide not to adopt the amendments, that will count as acceptance of the proposal in its current form.
The amendments make an attempt to highlight the significance of net neutrality principles, such as applying the same scrutiny across networks regardless of their market share.
But telecoms law expert Chris Marsden at the University of Sussex told the BBC there is reluctance within the parliament to do this because it could delay and possibly jeopardise other parts of the rules which aim to abolish EU roaming charges.
"If the parliament votes for [the amendments] and they amend the text that the governments had all agreed to - then the whole thing would actually fail [if the Council of Ministers also rejects the plan]," he explained. In that case, a further reading of the rules would have to be arranged.
How could the rules affect internet use?
Part of the problem with the rules in their current form, argued Joe McNamee of theSave the Internet campaign, is that they are ambiguous.
"As the text currently stands there is no indication as to how much abuse of dominance would be permissible under this arrangement," he told the BBC.
The sort of scenarios that could impact internet use include the creation of "fast lanes" and "slow lanes" - traffic prioritised depending on fees paid by content providers - or the creation of "zero ratings" in which some services may be accessed without using up any of the internet user's data quota.
In Belgium, for example, some mobile phone companies currently allow unlimited access to Twitter and Facebook while all other data usage is part of a monthly plan. In a few countries such as the Netherlands, such practices are not allowed.
However, regulators would have to decide on the specifics of what would and would not be allowed before any EU-wide changes could be enforced.
Proponents of net neutrality say it's the best way to enable free and open competition on the webImage copyrightGetty Images
Image captionProponents of net neutrality say it's the best way to enable free and open competition on the web
Who is arguing that the amendments be adopted?
Besides a host of net neutrality campaigners, inventor of the world wide web Sir Tim Berners-Lee has added his voice to those supporting the amendments.
"If adopted as currently written, these rules will threaten innovation, free speech and privacy, and compromise Europe's ability to lead in the digital economy," he wrote in a blog.
Meanwhile a string of tech companies have signed a letter to the president of the European Parliament, Martin Schulz, asking MEPs to adopt the amendments.
The firms include Netflix, Tumblr, Vimeo, Kickstarter and Reddit.
"I was contacted by a number of start-ups and investors because they were deeply concerned about the impact of the European Parliament's network neutrality proposals on start-up innovation in Europe," Stanford professor Barbara van Schewick, who helped pen the letter, told the BBC.
Is it likely the amendments will pass?
In order for the amendments to be adopted, they would have to achieve an overall majority of MEPs - 376 out of 751 members.
Dr Marsden believes this is unlikely but Dr van Schewick said she believed there was some growing momentum within the parliament on incorporating the changes.
Tom Wheeler, chairman of the US Federal Communications Commission, has overseen a long-running debate net neutralityImage copyrightGetty Images
Image captionTom Wheeler, chairman of the US Federal Communications Commission, has overseen a long-running debate on net neutrality
Do other countries have net neutrality?
Interestingly, three countries within the EU - Netherlands, Slovenia and Finland - already have a range of net neutrality rules enshrined in law.
These laws might have to be altered depending on how any new, EU-wide rules are interpreted by regulators later.
Elsewhere, net neutrality has received some regulatory protection in the United States after a vote in February this year placed new restrictions on what deals could be sought by internet firms with content providers.
But in other countries, such as India, "zero rating" is allowed.
"It's a fragmented picture across the board," said Dr Marsden.
"It's an extremely difficult area and there are probably no absolutely right answers."

Tuesday, 13 October 2015

EU climate chief hails global progress on emissions

EU climate chief hails global progress on emissions

  • 13 October 2015
  •  
  • From the sectionScience & Environment
Miguel Arias CaneteImage copyrightAP
Image captionCommissioner Canete says the published plans are "astounding"
Europe's climate change chief says he is astonished at the positive progress by governments towards a global deal on CO2.
Miguel Arias Cañete said it was "quite astounding" that 149 nations have published their plans to curb carbon emissions.
He told BBC News that even six months ago he would not have believed such commitments would emerge.
Nations have been announcing plans ahead of the Paris climate summit.
He warned, though, that nations' pledges had not yet reached the level needed to prevent potentially dangerous warming.
Mr Cañete said: "There are many, many reasons to be cheerful. The fact that 149 countries to date have presented the United Nations their commitments to fight global warming is astonishing.
"We have countries which together produce nearly 90% of global emissions - so that's a big effort. If we compare it with the Kyoto Protocol - the first time we tried an international agreement to help global warming - there were only 35 countries and they covered less than 14% of emissions.
"It's quite astounding. The most important things is that the commitments are not only figures or targets - it shows countries are developing climate policies in a very comprehensive way."

Top-down target

Mr Cañete said the key was that instead of a UN conference imposing top-down targets, governments were volunteering their own action plans.
"There is no complacency - but we if we had kept on going with business as usual (ever-rising carbon emissions), global temperature would have raised between 3.8 and 4.7C," he said.
"We estimate that current commitments achieve about 3C maximum. That's a big step, although clearly it's not enough."
The generally agreed maximum "safe" temperature rise is 2C - although some vulnerable nations say this is not safe for them.
Professor Jacquie McGlade, chief scientist of the UN environment programme (UNEP) told BBC News: "I am very surprised in a positive way - the normal procedure for these events has been governments brought kicking and struggling to the table.
"Now I see member states, citizens are willingly pledging for transformational change in society. It's a participatory progress so you do feel it will stick when we leave Paris (the climate conference next month)," she said.
"When countries saw the big players - the EU, the USA - put their figures on the table, there's a bit of copycat - which is a good thing.
"Some countries sent in their commitments and having seen other countries, they took them away and came back with more ambition. That tells you this is going to be a race to the top, not the bottom." Gabon was one example, she said.
Prof McGlade, based in Nairobi, said Africa was suffering the consequences of climate change already and was determined to tackle the problem itself.
"There is a sense that this is a universal problem - the 'them and us' is beginning to disappear," she told BBC News.
"Africa is becoming more and more conscious that it has to be a leader (on energy) if it wants to attract investment. You see Africa approaching this with an appetite, then you see a country like the UK not being pro-active in a way we would have recognised before."
Charles Sena Ayenu, a Ghanaian solar entrepreneur taking part in the Rabat meeting, said: "There's still work to be done, but I see a lot of optimism, a lot of excitement and passion - not just from governments but from the private sector like us."
The positive comments are predicated on the expectation that nations will actually carry out their promises. They contradict the conclusions of a new report from the former UK chief energy scientist David Mackay, which asserts that the UN talks are doomed to fail because nations will do as little as possible.
Mr Cañete stressed that the current wave of commitments should be a starting point, not a finishing point. The EU wants the Paris conference to agree the need for a regular review of climate targets.
Follow Roger on Twitter.

360 lashes over Saudi wine

UK pensioner Karl Andree faces 360 lashes over Saudi wine

Karl AndreeImage copyrightKirsten Piroth
A UK pensioner caught with homemade wine in Saudi Arabia could receive 360 lashes - a punishment his family say would kill him.
Karl Andree, 74, has already spent more than a year in prison since being arrested by Saudi religious police.
His daughter Kirsten Piroth told the BBC her father - who has suffered from three types of cancer - "would not survive" the punishment lashes.Kirsten Piroth: "I cannot believe that they would administer that to an old man because he wouldn't survive it"
The Foreign Office said it was "seeking his release as soon as possible".
Alcohol is illegal in Saudi Arabia and Mrs Piroth said her father was transporting homemade wine in his car in August 2014 when he was pulled over and arrested.

'Not very well'

Mr Andree's one-year prison sentence is now complete and Mrs Piroth said her family had been "led to believe" the lashes would not be given due to her father's age and health.
But she said there now "seems to be some question mark" over that.
"He's an old man, he's 74, he's survived three types of cancer with very strong cancer treatments, he's asthmatic, he has gout - he's not very well," she said.
"He's got a great spirit but his bodily health is not great and I just feel like he received his sentence and he did his time and I just want him home now."
Karl Andree and Kirsten PirothImage copyrightKirsten Piroth
Image captionMrs Piroth said her father had a range of health problems
She said time was "of the essence" due to her father's age, adding that he had "paid for what he did" in Saudi Arabia and should now be released.
Asked if she was happy with the help given by UK authorities, she said: "I don't really understand why it's taking so long because it's my understanding in that system that it needs... a phone call to the right person and he could be released."
Mr Andree's son Simon told the BBC his father had "enjoyed living in Saudi Arabia for 25 years and has been very happy there".
He said he understood the laws and regretted what had happened.
"But he should be released," he said. "My mother has dementia and is deteriorating quite rapidly and my father really wants to come back and see her."

'Severe' punishments

A Foreign Office spokesman said: "Our embassy staff are continuing to assist Mr Andree, including regular visits to check on his welfare, and frequent contact with his lawyer and family.
"Ministers and senior officials have raised Mr Andree's case with the Saudi government and we are actively seeking his release as soon as possible."
The Foreign Office website warns that penalties for possessing alcohol in Saudi Arabia are "severe".
It also warns of Saudi laws against women driving, adultery, homosexuality and drug smuggling - with the last punishable by death.
Last month Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn called on UK Prime Minister David Cameron to press Saudi authorities to reduce the sentence of a protester sentenced to death in the country.
Meanwhile, Tuesday's Times reports a disagreement in the UK cabinet over a £5.9m deal to provide "training-needs analysis" to the Saudi penal system.
According to the newspaper, Justice Secretary Michael Gove wants to "pull out of the agreement" because he believes the government should not assist a regime that uses beheading, stoning, crucifixion and lashing as punishments.

Monday, 12 October 2015

the climate summit in Paris is too focussed on self interest

Paris climate summit: UN negotiations 'need redesign'

  • 8 hours ago
  •  
  • From the sectionScience & Environment
ParisImage copyrightThinkstock
Image captionScientists say the climate summit in Paris is too focussed on self interest
The UN climate negotiations are heading for failure and need a major redesign if they are to succeed, scientists say.
The pledges that individual countries are offering ahead of the Paris climate summit in December are too entrenched in self interest instead of being focussed on a common goal.
The researchers say the science of cooperation is being ignored.
Instead, they say the negotiations should focus on a common commitment on the global price of carbon.
This means countries would agree on a uniform charge for carbon pollution, a scheme that would encourage polluters to reduce their emissions.
The comments from researchers at the University of Cambridge, UK, University of Maryland, US, and University of Cologne, in Germany, are published in the journal Nature.
'I will, if you will'
Ahead of December's United Nations climate meeting, individual countries have submitted their plans for cutting greenhouse gas emissions. These are calledIntended Nationally Determined Contributions - or INDCs.
However, the researchers say that this approach will not work.
Prof David MacKay, from the University of Cambridge, who was former chief scientific advisor to Britain's Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC), said: "The science of cooperation predicts that if all you are doing is naming individual contributions - offers that aren't coupled to each other - then you'll end up with a relatively poor outcome.
"We have the history of the Kyoto agreement as an example of this. Initially, the approach was to find a common commitment, but eventually it descended into a patchwork of individual commitments... and that led to very weak commitments and several countries leaving the process."
The Paris negotiations, he warned, were heading in the same direction.
Instead, the researchers say, a reciprocal approach could transform the meeting.
"If you make a treaty that is based on reciprocity, so 'I will, if you will' and 'I won't, if you won't', then you can end up in a very different position," explained Prof MacKay.
"If people make a common commitment that they will match what others do, then it becomes in your self interest to advocate a high level of action because it will apply not only to you but also to others."
Traffic jamImage copyrightThinkstock
Image captionThe scientists say setting an agreed global charge for carbon emissions
The scientists believe that setting a common price for carbon, which could be implemented through carbon tax or emissions trading schemes, could work.
Prof MacKay said: "This is a price that could be negotiated and agreed, and would apply to all countries."
The researchers admit that with the Paris climate conference just weeks away and the fact that global carbon pricing is not already on the table, their idea is unlikely to have much influence.
However, they say the science of cooperation should be taken into account for future negotiations.
Commenting on the paper, Bob Ward from the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, said: "This is a thoughtful contribution but rather too pessimistic about the United Nations climate change negotiations.
"The authors are right that a global price on carbon is necessary, although it would be, on its own, insufficient to generate the pace and scale of action required."