Dr. Evil vs. Iranian. com


Ari Siletz
by Ari Siletz

AIPAC doesn’t like the drift of some IC bloggers. So they pressure IC’s  internet service carrier to slow our site way down. It takes hours to load and watch that sexy Persian dance video and we stop coming to the site. This hypothetical scenario doesn’t happen right now because of something called net neutrality. The internet service provider doesn’t look at IC data and say, “this data must wait till tomorrow because I’ve got a higher paying customer” or worst “I’m not sending this data at all because the government or a lobby group won’t like it.” With net neutrality nothing is sacred. But the internet Axis of Evil, Google and Verizon, are proposing to kill the wonderful world of net neutrality that we now enjoy and perhaps don’t appreciate.    

Like everything else in history, this "new communications technology" scenario has played out before.  In the heyday of the telegraph, Western Union refused to transmit reports that didn't come from its own news reporters.  So the government made a rule that said the company had to be neutral—we got telegraph neutrality. The beautiful rule they applied to Western Union is called the common carrier rule (later extended to the telephone). Thanks to this rule you can call and order any kind of pizza you want. A telephone service that happens to be owned by a peperoni company can’t say “We can’t let you make this phone call because you don’t like peperoni on your pizza.”

Turns out this democratic rule didn’t apply to text messages. Go figure! In 2007 Verizon blocked text messages from a political group that advocated free choice in the abortion issue. US law said “none of my business” because the Constitution forbids only the government from stifling free speech. Private companies like Google or Verizon can stifle all they want.  Western Union had to cave to free speech because the government told them that the "common carrier" rule applied to them. Verizon is trying to duck the same fate by arguing that a disgruntled pro-choice activist is free to dump Verizon and use another service which doen't mind the abortion controversy. They're not a monopoly like Western Union used to be.

Would IC hypothetically as a political or commercial target be free to
use other internet service providers?These alternatives could also be
pressured, or charge high “black market” prices.What happened with text messages can happen with websites if Google and Verizon succeed in getting the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) to adopt their internet murdering proposal. Following in the footsteps of other treasonous government regulatory agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency or the Securities and Exchange Commission, the FCC is making fake protests while holding closed door meetings with Google and Verizon. As in, screw public interest, goodbye net neutrality.  

What would keep this nightmare scenario from happening is an FFC rule that slaps down the Google-Verizon proposal and makes it so that no internet service provider can refuse IC. They should make net neutrality the law of the land. Net neutrality activists have been trying to accomplish just that, but FCC regulators seem to take moneyed interests more seriously than the public that actually pays their salaries.


Democracy, use it or lose it. A pissed off petition to sign can be found here.

Note: Google-Verizon is sneakily proposing non-neutrality only on wireless internet services. But they know full well that wireless is the future. Try buying a dial phone or a tube TV these days and you’ll catch my drift.


Recently by Ari SiletzCommentsDate
چرا مصدق آسوده نمی خوابد.
Aug 17, 2012
This blog makes me a plagarist
Aug 16, 2012
Double standards outside the boxing ring
Aug 12, 2012
more from Ari Siletz
Real McCoy

I signed, only to be a good sport

by Real McCoy on

However I don't mind to see some cyber stuff to slow down, if not stopped altogether.

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

eroonman jan

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


Your understanding is not right anymore. Internet is being suppored by infrastructure put in by various providers and infrastructure companies.

These are paid for by premiums that we all pay to our internet providers. From the hookup in the house we *pay* someone. Verizon; Comcast for cable or fios. Or a phone company for DSL or phone *as* well as a provider on the other end of the phone line.

Bigger companies pay for high speed T1; T10 or something else to another provider. No one is doing us a favor. What Google and Verizon want to do it to *double* charge. Once to give us the service. And to then force the web sites to pay them for the privilage of being allowed in our house over line WE PAID for already.

Verizon already charges its subscribers. It gets a monopoly in return; nice deal for them. Google makes money by ads. They provide no infrastructure. Neither one is doing us any favors. In fact the internet would be a better place with both of them gone. There will be other infrastructure providers. As for search engines I am sick of google pimping their garbage on me.


eroonman, what

by oktaby on

you understand has little to do with technology or politics of internet, and how it can be manipulated per G & V. One controls the dominant portion of search and the other the bandwidth. Add 2 + 2

There are plenty of resources on Internet history and who did/is doing what and why. IBM (read Von Neumann related info on how IBM intertwined with government but providing servers does not give them any special rights or privileges), GE (has done little for Internet) & Inktomi (founded in 1996 and not a part of Internet founding or key players-now owned by Yahoo), are not charities and have never done anything for free and never will. Nor their contributions to internet amount to much. Them and many others are beneficiaries of government activities and contracts funded by our tax dollars not just their own innovations. Google included.

Giving credit for what they may have done is good but lets not give away the baby with bath water. 


Azadeh Azad


by Azadeh Azad on

... to keep Dr. Evil away. Thanks Ari for the info & link. 



Net Neutrality is for freeloaders

by eroonman on

One of the things to remember is that the current version of the internet was designed to allow academics to communicate between higher institutions of learning somewhat more efficiently than using the mail  the phone, or faxing research results across the globe.

For the most part it runs the same now as it did when it was put in place.

The way it works is that companies like Inktomi, IBM, GE and many others, essentially sponsor the internet by providing the servers that power it.

They do this for free.

Now that 90% of this internet bandwidth has been taken up by YouTube videos of funny cats, and with Google pretty much the only one making any real money from it, they are understandably tired of propping up the now exploding infrastructure. Just so YouTube and Google can benefit from their kindness.

That's the problem with Net Neutrality. It isn't really neutral at all, but one sided, and not in favor of those doing all of the heavy lifting behind the scenes.

The threat that these companies will pull the plug on the internet isn't great, but it hovers around precariously with each economic downturn and is getting to be real. One day, as one of the majors finally says "Enough!", and pulls out, you will see a slow down if not an outright outage in your Neutral internet.

In addition the original founders of the internet never perceived a need to control SPAM, so the email system currently in place, allows anonymous sending, or masks the identity of the sender, by accident. 

Google and Verizon are merely suggesting and posing what has already been on the mind of many, especially those who have propped up the internet for so long, suggesting a possible pay to use version of the internet, so that it isn't dependent on generosity, but works like any other commercial enterprise that must be paid for.

Yes, as usual Google and Verizon are interested in this for financial reasons. But the same financial motives they have, have also created the highest quality overall online experience with all the free software and services Google provides, along with the most reliable and robust mobile phone network in the world.

So it works.

If I understand the concept being proposed correctly, there would be 2 internets, a pay to play one where the services running on it are premium, and a free good old internet that we enjoy (for free) today.

While the fear is that if you are not on the premium channel you will suffer some sort of outrageous service lag, the reality is that you will probably get the same service if not better one, just more like a Public TV version.

Since most IC readers (and writers) also love NPR, this should not be much of a change that anyone will notice. The Entourage and True Blood fans can pay Google or Verizon for the sexy channels if they want to.

Hoshang Targol

Very substantial matter, indeed

by Hoshang Targol on



ebi amirhosseini


by ebi amirhosseini on


Ebi aka Haaji



by oktaby on

This battle is about 4 years old. G & V seems to have decided use their muscles and collude but my guess is they won't get their way. The battle is just heating up and will be joined by many. Complacency is not an option though. 

Thanks Ari 


PS: this is a U.S. petition but you can use a proxy with U.S. IP; For zip u can use a 5 digit # off google :)


Nice blog Ari,

by yousef on


Red Wine


by Red Wine on

This is just for Canada and United States I.P .. I will vote it next week when i am in N.Y .

Thank you Ari jan .



by Anonymouse on

Everything is sacred

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan


by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on

Thanks Ari

Mardom Mazloom

For the ZIP code

by Mardom Mazloom on

They normally allow people from the US and Canada to sign the petition. But I had a problem to enter my Canadian Zip code which is a 6 length alpha-numeric code. The error displayed, was Zip codes should be 5 or 9 numerical digits ! - thinking of US ZIP codes probably.

I countered the problem by entering an american ZIP code (with my address in Canada) that I've found on the net. More exactly the one of the university of Maryland - 20742 - The petition is now signed by me.

For non american residents, you can also do the same by entering an american address. Do these people look really at the addresses while they ask for emails?

Darius Kadivar

Tried to Sign but it demands a US Zip Code ?

by Darius Kadivar on

Is this petition only for Resident American signaturies ?

Ari Siletz

با کامل میل شراب سرخ محترم.

Ari Siletz


شرکت‌های گوگل و ورایزن گاو بندی کرده اند تا بیان آزاد اینترنتی را از
یک حق عمومی‌ تبدیل به کالا کنند و به مزایده گذارند. بدین طریق که اگر
عملکرد و یا نظرات یک تار نما (مثل ایرانیان دات کام) به ضرر مشتری‌های قدرتمندتر محسوب شود این حق را بخود بدهند که این تار نما را با محدود
کردن سرویس ورشکست کنند. تا بحال بیان اینترنتی مثل بیان تلفنی آزاد بوده
است. حتا اگر یک شرکت تلفن گفتار و تجارت شما را به ضرر خود و یا مشتری ثروتمند بداند حق
ندارد شما را از سرویس تلفنی محروم کند  و یا شما را به سرویس نامرغوب تری
محدود کند. اینترنت هم قرار بود همینطور باشد. ولی‌ گوگل و ورایزن
میخواهند دولت مقرراتی تصویب کند که اینترنت را از این رویه معقول استثنا
کند. این نامه اعتراضیست به این قضیه.



by comrade on

The petition didn't take my postal particular until I faked 90210 as my ZIP. The discriminatory policy seems already in place.

"Learning carries within itself certain dangers because out of necessity one has to learn from one's enemies."


Red Wine


by Red Wine on

شما معمولا جواب من را در بلاگ‌هایتان نمیدهید (شاید تقصیر در بد نویسی ما باشد و کم لطفی‌ زمانه !) و ما هم معمولا بلاگ‌های غیر فارسی‌ را نمیخوانیم چون به اندیشه‌های ما نزدیک نیست اما مطالب شما را میخوانیم و میخواستیم بپرسیم که میشود یک توضیح مختصری دیگر به فارسی‌ بدهید تا ما هم این مطلب را امضا کنیم ؟ دست شما درد نکند آری جان.



by faryarm on

Lets hope it helps...

Jahanshah Javid


by Jahanshah Javid on

This is really important and you make great sense Ari. I signed the petition. Thanks so much for raising awareness.


Merci Ari jan for bringing this to our attention.

by Bavafa on

And I agree, if we can not use and protect our democracy here, have no business advocating it for Iran.

Just signed the petition and send it to a few friends.


Sargord Pirouz

Ari,  A well explained and

by Sargord Pirouz on


A well explained and referenced post. And thanks for the convenient link to the form letter. Of course I filled it out and signed. 

Ari Siletz

Many thanks, BN!

by Ari Siletz on

As much as you hate abusive authority I love Diaspora Iranians who appreciate and make use of the democracy of their host countries. Otherwise our call for a democracy in Iran sounds hollow. Why waste lives trying to achieve demcracy in Iran when we don't even use what we've got right here ? Thanks for signing the petition.

bajenaghe naghi

Ari jan

by bajenaghe naghi on

Thank you for the informative post. 

I hate abusive authority and bullying corporations. I just signed the petition.