Internet Service Providers

It's Day 29 of the cyberspace hostage crisis. No, it's not a case of terrorism in a galaxy far, far away. It is what one Web site developer calls "electronic tyranny," in which the Internet identity and cyber property of some small businesses are held virtual captives by noncompliant Internet service providers. Picture this: You're the proud owner of Karen's Widgets, a thriving business that wants to establish an outpost on the Internet.

To avoid the reach of U.S. copyright laws, numerous online pirates have set up shop in countries less willing or able to enforce intellectual property rights. Policymakers agree that these "rogue" sites pose a real problem for U.S. artists and rights holders who aren't getting paid for the rampant distribution of their music, movies and other creative works. The question is how to help them. Lawmakers keep offering proposals, but they don't seem to be getting any closer to the right answer.

The seminar was so pessimistic and foreboding that I still remember it with a chill, though it took place five years ago. Pioneering Internet entrepreneurs, economists and populist academics at the Computers, Freedom and Privacy conference all rose to decry what at the time seemed inevitably around the corner. Internet services, the link that even then was beginning to seem as necessary as air, would soon be available only from a handful of big telecom companies.

After months of negotiations, movie studios, record labels and five top U.S. Internet service providers have come up with a framework for combating online piracy. Under the agreement announced Thursday, the ISPs will send warnings to customers whose broadband accounts had been used to transmit or receive copyrighted works without permission. Anyone who ignores repeated warnings will face a penalty, such as a slower Internet connection. It's not as draconian as the entertainment industry had sought, and it won't address underground sites that stream bootlegged movies and music.

Viacom Inc.'s MTV Networks told CompuServe Corp. and other large Internet service providers that if they want their MTV, they'll have to pay for it. The music television channel plans to charge providers 2 cents to 5 cents a month per subscriber for access to its news and reviews. For CompuServe, with 5.3 million subscribers, the fee amounts to as much as $3.18 million a year. "Why would we pay for a free site and why are they only going after national Internet service providers?"

AT&T Corp. is giving 320 customers in Boulder, Colo., a choice of four Internet service providers, the first of two planned trials to open AT&T cable lines without government intervention, an AT&T attorney said. EarthLink Inc., Juno Online Services Inc., AT&T-owned WorldNet and Excite@Home are connecting people to the Internet over AT&T's cable system, said Maria Arias, corporate counsel for AT&T Broadband, at a conference of state regulators.

Internet service providers called for industrywide guidelines to protect privacy online in testimony before the Senate Commerce Committee on Thursday. But they want to set the guidelines themselves. "We ought to go forward with this self-regulatory approach," said Tom Tauke, executive vice president of Verizon Communications Inc. Executives for Time Warner Cable Inc. and AT&T Inc., the biggest Internet service provider in the nation, also testified before the committee.

In a surprise alliance that would create the country's No. 2 Internet access provider, EarthLink Network of Pasadena agreed Thursday to merge with Atlanta-based MindSpring Enterprises in a deal that is expected to accelerate the deployment of high-speed Internet services. The combination would create a $3.

ONLINE FIGHT: Internet service providers are evolving as media giants invade their domain.

Amdocs Ltd., which sells billing software for telephone companies, agreed to buy Canadian rival Solect Technology Group Inc. for about $1 billion in stock to add Internet service providers as customers. Amdocs shares rose $8.69 to $74.19 on the NYSE.

Andrew McLaughlin built Google Inc.'s public policy operation and helped craft its government lobbying strategy. Now he works for the White House on Internet policy — and that has some Google rivals crying foul as federal officials prepare to rewrite the rules governing high-speed Internet. The so-called net neutrality rules expected to be issued by the Federal Communications Commission are seen as a boon to Google by limiting the ability of high-speed Internet service providers, such as phone and cable companies, to steer users to their own content.

The volume of junk e-mail sent worldwide may have dropped drastically Wednesday after a San Jose Web-hosting firm, identified by many in the computer security community as a major host of organizations engaged in spam activity, was taken offline. McColo Co., which computer security experts say serves as a U.S. staging ground for international firms that sell items including counterfeit pharmaceuticals and child pornography, ceased operations after two Internet providers blocked Web access.

Internet service providers called for industrywide guidelines to protect privacy online in testimony before the Senate Commerce Committee on Thursday. But they want to set the guidelines themselves. "We ought to go forward with this self-regulatory approach," said Tom Tauke, executive vice president of Verizon Communications Inc. Executives for Time Warner Cable Inc. and AT&T Inc., the biggest Internet service provider in the nation, also testified before the committee.

Federal regulators issued a warning to all Internet service providers Friday with a sharp rebuke of Comcast Corp. for blocking some customers from using file-sharing technology. By a 3-2 vote, the Federal Communications Commission found that the cable company failed to tell its subscribers about the blocking, lied about it when confronted by the commission and tried to cripple online video sites that compete with its on-demand service.

A key House lawmaker said Thursday that Internet service providers should be prohibited from tracking customers' Web activities to deliver targeted ads without those users' clear approval. The controversial practice, pioneered by Silicon Valley start-up NebuAd Inc., has drawn fire from privacy advocates. They say the technology, known as deep packet inspection, raises major concerns and potentially violates federal and state wiretapping laws. Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.

Executives from major Internet players -- Microsoft Corp., Google Inc. and Facebook Inc. -- are due for a grilling about online privacy in a Senate committee hearing today, but the company likely to get the most scrutiny is a small Silicon Valley start-up called NebuAd Inc.

RE "The Pretenders," Dec. 19: Robin Abcarian worries that "websites like MySpace ... are helping to spawn a generation of uninhibited liars." If so, it's not a moment too soon. In coming years, these young people will be lied to by vendors, manufacturers, utilities, phone companies, cable companies, Internet service providers, insurance sales reps and health management organizations. An expectation of honesty leaves them defenseless in today's world. JEAN MOORE Los Angeles

A Microsoft Corp. executive acknowledged Wednesday that the software giant pressured certain Internet service providers to strongly promote Microsoft's Internet browser because many consumers, if given an easier way to choose, would have selected a rival product.

Comcast Corp., the nation's second-largest Internet service provider, is considering setting an official limit on the amount of data that subscribers can download each month and charging a fee for those who go over. For years, Comcast has directly called customers who use up several times more bandwidth than the typical subscriber's 2 gigabytes a month. The big users were asked to cut back or their accounts would be canceled. Some Comcast customers have griped that the company hasn't been more forthcoming about the bandwidth ceiling that spurred calls.

Internet service providers would be given specific responsibilities to report child pornography on their sites and face tough penalties for not doing so under a bill passed by the House. The bill, which passed 409 to 2, expands the reporting duties of ISPs with respect to violations of child sexual exploitation and pornography laws. ISPs that failed to report incidents would be subject to fines of $150,000 per image per day, up from the current $50,000.