In the fall of 2003, students of Swarthmore College became participants in a political fight.  They published information about the election process when 15,000 e-mail messages disappeared from one of the main voting machines (Diebold Election System) in the United States. Digital Millennium Copyright (D.M.C.A.), the law about intellectual property added them troubles. This law protects Internet and phone service providers from having to share their information.  If any problem appears, they delete this information. After warning the students, Diebold removed the material.  Incredible as it may seem, the attempts of the students changed the company’s decision about opening the case.  The information was restored.

            The same problems touched many sides of U.S. culture: art, science, and politics.  Companies began suing the Girl Scouts, consumers, and other companies for any reason they could find.  The growing quantity of information on the Internet pushed creating industries into reinforcing the laws by lengthening copyright terms, for example.  Understanding as fact the temporary nature of those actions, lawyers, scholars, and other activist groups argued that legislation was manipulated by the number of involved companies.  The activists asserted that hiding the information from the public is more than an unfair and silly action because everybody borrows everything from the world where it already exists.  It is necessary for a society to use an intellectual property because both of them are interdependent.  The members of “Copy Left” warn that if we don’t do anything with the copyright laws, we’ll lose in the labyrinth of legal and illegal privacy.  We already do, inside the Internet.

            Thomas Jefferson helped increase the time before having to divulge the innovations and works of art before they are made public.  Again, it only works for a short period of time because copyright protections are not forever.  But the fact is:  ending the terms of copyrights allows information to enter public domain.

            Only two basic laws have helped the copyright system to survive. In 1909, by changing the definition of what a copyright is, the Copyright Act started to regulate the process not only publishing but copying somebody else’s work. In 1976, copyrights tightened to fit European standards. When Internet came into our life, everybody saw a problem: even the copying of the information onto the Internet breaks the law. Lessig, who was one of the members of Copy Left hoped to bring Jefferson’s rules back because nobody knew what information they could post without being sued.

The year before this article was published, Lessig came out against lengthening the terms of copyrights. He asserted that this act is an infringement of the Constitution, and copyrights should exist only temporarily. Copy Left failed that case. Earlier, Lessig had made one other attempt: he found Creative Common, a company that worked on solving an individual’s copyright problems. The company created a special program that helped manage the access to the works legally. Creative Common changed the quantity of available works and made the access to them chipper and easier: texts, songs, and photographs could be used with the permission of their authors. Now, Creative Common has representatives in 10 countries.

The professor of Yale, Yochai Benkler, asserts that everybody want to participate in the development of the culture. People like to be engaged in the main process because they not just part of the technology. Author met Benkler in New York. The professor, in his 20’s, lived in a kibbutz. The kibbutz had tried to create a separate society because the current one was too destructive, but it didn’t work. Isolating the rest of society put the kibbutz at a very low level of development. Benkler hadn’t given up. Later, he believed that if people could pay for telephone service more than for records, then the time would come and things could change. The importance of sharing creations with each other would grow. He also believed that there would a new model of successful cooperation between corporations and consumers, such as Google. Benkler asserted that recording companies would have great success in the future because they produce a very important product for the whole culture.

            Opponents of the Copy Left came up with another model of the industrial market: everything there has to have an owner. Jane Ginsburg, a professor at Columbia Law School, was afraid that Copy Left’s model affects the authors. Corporations and individuals find a way to benefit from other’s creations every time, and here copyright law has to protect the author – not just give his works out to the public. Ginsburg cited iTunes as an example of consumer’s freedom.

            Paul Goldshtein, a professor at Stanford Law School, agreed with Ginsburg. He illuminated in his book at the correct relationship between creation and consumer: everybody has to pay for the opportunity to use another’s work. It will help the producers decide what content they have to put on the market.

            William Fisher, director of the Berkman Center, created a completely new model of regulating payments for artist’s works. The system shows when money goes to the author. The main department of this system has to manage all payments and pay back from the taxes to the author every time his work was used. For now, this proposal is the best solution of the copyright problem. Fisher said that entertainment industries paid attention to his payment model with high interest. He also believed that countries, excluding a small number of them, have the possibility of working with his system. U.S. will have this chance, too, but only when other opportunities will not work.

            James Boyle, one more member of Copy Left, compared information with the environment where we have common lands and forests – the same as with intellectual property: the public domain that consists of this property needs to be protected from destruction. 

I agree with the idea of creating a new system that will help to fix the chaotic situation in the media world. But I’m sure some people will turn it into a way of solving their own problems. Laws are created with purpose to break them. We have the opportunity to understand the necessity of sharing our ideas, or we will be closer to a new war that will bring us more suffering than we can imagine. Everybody wants to be treated fairly, and fairness of every person in this world depends on her own heart.

They are everywhere. They think that they have unlimited power in the virtual space. Insolent and fearless, bullies feel superiority under their objects of persecution. But still you have a chance to defend yourself, your family and your friends from that kind of cyber attack.

About cyberbullying

            With the help of every possible device a bully can make your life insufferable, if he or she knew your telephone number or your mail address. It could be worse, if the bully is trying to find a physical contact with you and following every your step. Because if the growing popularity of the Internet communications, it is easier for the persecutors to continue to write the list of possible directions, which they could use for intimidations. It could be email, messenger program, sites with all kind of media, for instance. Most of the people have cell phones, computers and other personal devices, bought for the purpose to make themselves easy to reach in any time at any place. These people usually don’t count on cyberbullies.

            The rancor of persecutors may raise from insulting rumors to constant harassment of the poor victim. Who knows what cyberbullies can make up and how mighty they will be in the future? The most significant protection from that kind of abusing should be in educational organizations: schools, colleges, and universities. It is very easy, to reach such parts of society where most of its members do not have enough money or power to protect themselves or punish the abuser in any possible way.

How strong are the cyberbullies?

            Selectiveness of the authorization on the Internet helps the bully’s actions stay invisible and become more destructive. There are no clues of the offence without the personal information about the infringer. The intimidations become much stronger since bullies don’t know the target personally. All kinds of electronic media may contain threatening information and can spread around the world in few minutes avoiding barriers and protections. Internet is a very powerful tool in the hands of a professional cyberbully. The Internet is faster then any other way of transportation of information. People enter so much personal data that makes almost everybody unsafe.

            It is obvious that cyber persecution could lead to a stronger significant threat. Unfortunately, cyberbullying may be an example of raising the severity in recent years. Probably it will grow with constant power.

Few steps to avoid the problem

1.      Pay attention where you access the Internet. A person, who has to pay attention to what kind of information he or she entered, also has to be aware of who has access to this particular computer. Any personal information that contains such elements of somebody’s intimate life as his or her own contact information, hobbies or description of any other activities increase the possibility of future intimidations.

2.      Do not reply to any oppression of the bully. If you reply to the bully with the anger, you automatically become like a bully. The situation will not change this way. Stay a human. Cut the bully’s attempt to unbalance you. Otherwise, your persecutor will be just teased; he or she will choose to increase their mockeries. Try everything you can do: create another email address, if somebody has attacked your old one. Changing a cell phone number can be helpful, too. But it could be difficult to do sometimes. It may stop the receiving of unwanted emails, phone calls and instant messages. But if it still happening, you have to take care of the problem by making stronger actions.

3.      Try to make a copy of everything you do. If you have an access to the Internet outside of your house, make copy of every online action you did. The emails and messages you’ve posted have to have an appropriate date and time. It is faster then to write it down by your hand.

4.      Contact the organization that can help you with the problem. Authorities of your town or city can help you, if you received any intimidation and could not have an opportunity to deal with the bully. There are appropriate rules and policies that will find a salvation of the problem. You can report abuse to police or FBI, for instance. They will consider the case and decide what kind of offence it was, and what they have to do after. Also it will be better to talk with school officials. They have their own power tools to fight with problems.

            Children have to know how to use the Internet safely. They need to understand that some of the Internet content might be dangerous for them and their parents. Talk with your children every time. They have to learn how to recognize the threat and tell about it to their parents. Make up the rules for using electronic devices in your house. It will help to reduce the opportunity to become a victim of cyber persecutors.

            I suppose these kinds of offences have to be punished similarly as if it were a type of physical abuse. Those people didn’t find their field of activities with good intentions, so they try to harass other people and make their lives most unattractive. I wish some of these things would happen: either bullies will understand that they destroy the world where they live, or the strongest protection from their mockeries will be found.

Second Life is a virtual reality; a world that you can create yourself and live in. In 1999, it was build by Philip Rosendale, who started to collect the team, called Linden Lab, to care about Second Life. Second Life was sponsored by many people and companies, such as Mitch Kapor, Benchmark Capital and Ray Ozzie. Linden’s Lab employees are from: Electronic Arts, Disney, etc.

About a year ago, I was asked to join the Second Life team of North Shore Kabbalah Academy to build a virtual learning center (Ari Online Kabbalah Educational Center). It was interesting to me because in the past I had been a fan of The Sims (Electronic Arts game). The Sims is a great opportunity to manage the world. You can build your own house, choose wallpaper, siding, buy furniture, make wire electricity through the entire house, and, finally, create your own avatar whom you can dress, put shoes on , add makeup to, and much more. The Second Life’s rules are almost the same but you can move around the virtual world at the same time with other people from all over the planet. There are fancy houses, top designers’ clothing and public sex houses, too. Yes. Behind each avatar stands a real person. Who knows what they are looking for?

Well, after spending 3 days in the place called Ivory Tower, I learned how to build and design things in Second Life (SL). A month ago, our first learning center was built. It was weird, but worked.

            People were sitting around and listening to the lector who had a microphone. There was a lot of trouble understanding how everything works. We needed permission and a correct link from the server to open an audio stream; otherwise we could not have the possibility of listening to a life-streaming audio. And so on.

            Now the center looks like this.

 From the store I bought a nice house. I made the necessary corrections for our purposes using special tools: size, color, texture, and angles of the prims. Prim is a meager unit of everything built “in the world” (that’s what Second Life’s reality is called between secondlifenians). From a cube, a cylinder, and/or a sphere you can build a box, a column, a chair, drums, etc.

            Now we have a big team – about 15 people. We have musicians. Every musical instrument has a special animation that a person can turn on, and his or her avatar will play on a violin, drums or on a piano. The screen shows movies. It requires that you have a Quick Time player. You can watch a movie because there is a script that is inside the screen. The script allows the object, which made as a screen, to stream a video. Linden Lab made up a special language that differs from the other languages for programming, which already exist. Almost every complicated object in the world has a script inside: a violin, a microphone, a “Giver” box. Scripts help represent what this object is “doing”. Touch a Giver box, and it will give you a Notecard with a description of what has been put inside: a course’s information, a book, or a landmark, for instance. You can keep all of them, so next time you can easily find this location in your Inventory’s folder with landmarks, or objects, or Notecards.

The book is a different and interesting story. I bought a special press to print it. You have to have set up all the pages; you have to upload all of them to Second Life; you have to follow all of the instructions EXACTLY during the process. After magnificent actions, your book will come up. Now you can read the book as you do in the real world. It has a good animation of turning over the pages, a sound of what you doing and the menu, where you can go to the site and buy a hard printed copy of this book, for example. I set up about 20 books for the Book fair that took place last spring in the world. People purchased our books, came to class to listen to a lesson and donated us a little money, about 300 Lindens. (1000 Linden dollars cost 4.09 American Green Crisps).

            I am also a cameraman. I was scared at the beginning of the first filming. You have to have a computer with very good parameters to launch the Second Life program. You go to the www.secondlife.com and download the installation file from there. You have to have a good memory on your computer, a fast processor, and a strong video card. I used to film a program, called Camtasia (a screen capturing program). I like it very much, because it is a powerful program and met a most of my requirements. Unfortunately, it stopped to work on my new computer, because it had a different operating system, Windows Vista (which I like but it still gives me a lot of problems). The problem is that Camtasia can’t recognize a sound card on your computer. I suppose the conflict of Vista with Camtasia still exists all over the world. I tried many programs that capture streaming video, but only one of them works on my computer – the Fraps (www.fraps.com). It is a free program specially designed for capturing 3D games. You can watch my clips on Youtube. My nickname there is zameret32.

            I can add one interesting detail. When our team started to make clips, we understood that the mouse does not have an appropriate flexibility in the world’s space. The mouse movements represent camera movements and zoom. One of my friends suggested that I buy a special device called Space Navigator on www.3DConnexion.com.

            It was very helpful advice. I know that Space Navigator is used for such programs as 3D Earth by Google, and others. This device is equal to a plane steering wheel in Second Life. It goes in every direction you want, including upside down, and requires some practice. Here is the link that helped me:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEAyMDDSh5g

This clip is made by Torley Linden, a cool guy from the Second Life support team. He has a lot of great supportive clips regarding Second Life on Youtube.  I made them in the program called Adobe Premiere.

I still have a lot of things to say, but suppose that it will be much better for you to check it out yourself. Thank you.

There are only four main search systems on the Web with almost the same search engine. Yahoo bought many of them, including AltaVista and Google.

Unfortunately, Yahoo is going to step on its own tail in an attempt to turn everything into a profit. Then it made Google a major target, getting rid of paid links there. But Yahoo stayed on top as well. Yahoo’s and Google’s first 100 results do not cross each other. Overall, each search differs only in its ability to give better results.

Yahoo pushed Microsoft to expand investigation of its engine. Microsoft has a good chance to leave Google behind, the same as Netscape. Spammers helped to solve a riddle of Google. There was no special formula of successful crawling. To build a search engine is not a secret anymore for anybody. The question is: “For what?”

Google, doubtless, is going much better than the others. It surveys almost 75 percent of all incoming information on the Web. If Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft make a war among themselves to struggle for first place, it will not be in our favor. The Web will change in unpredictable ways. Google is holding many webmasters under pressure. The main problem is in Google itself, who is fighting for advertisements. Sometimes, unexpected items can appear from your search results. It serves the influence the user to pay attention to the new referral. The advertisers are ready to pay Google generously for it.

Yahoo (and Microsoft, too) is hunting for those advertisers who want to place their ads in better locations. Despite the unexpected money stream from advertising, Google is serving a nonprofit-oriented part of the Web. Domain levels such as org, edu and gov don’t belong to the part that is making a lot of money. Experts are wanting new domains that will bring them a new pile of money.

Losing the interest to the developing AltaVista put Google on the top of the Web.

Nobody cares about the noncommercial sector; there is no Library of Congress site, for instance. Ford Foundation and the United Nations donated tons of money for public-sector purposes. It seems like the Internet is going to be crucified while everybody is watching.

From the second view, the reason for the fighting is Google’s data. The Government attended the war after September 11. Toward the purpose of security, Google didn’t open access to their information.

The situation from both sides is unclear; neither Washington spies or Google want to share their information. Even after the Government gave the last ones more possibilities. This problem is considered an important issue only to Google, Inc., itself.

There is only one articulated thing: Google’s data is not completely secure, and it influences the rest of the Web.

This combating triggered another pain in the neck for Google – Google Watch found the Page ranking problem. It means that high ranging pages can mark pages stronger than they are in fact.

We understand that Google might turn into a wormy apple if they will not change anything. But at the same time, Google Watch is trying to enunciate the Google situation, using our information. It could be a powerful addition to solve the main issue.

Why was Google nominated for a Big Brother award in 2003?

1. Google’s cookies forever. Google was the first who used long-term cookies after the Government banned the cookies that were placed constantly. These days constant cookies are not a miracle on the Web, regarding Google. These cookies assign a special number that updates itself by Google reading this number every time you are on the page.

2. Fact: Google is a good collector. When you open any Google page, your special number (ID), your computer’s IP address, the information you entered into the searching bar and your browser parameters – everything goes to Google’s database.

3. Not any closed door for Google. Google can access your data anytime they need.

4. Google can keep their mouths shut. They never tell you why they need all this information. I mean, never.

5. Google helps spies with jobs. Google has many open vacations for professionals with secret-work experience who can easily deliver the information to the Washington spies.

6. Google is watching you everywhere. Google’s toolbar reads all your cookies on every page you get, even if it is not a Google page. One of the search engines lost their case when they couldn’t make it clear why they do it. After that, Google included this information in their privacy policy. This toolbar updates automatically, giving to Google the way to the user’s hard drive during his or her connection to Google. This kind of software is aggressively dangerous when it does not ask the user for an update.

7. Google is a good copy machine. Every site’s cache is copied by Google. Webmasters prevent copying by placing a special meta to their sites.

8. Google does not like webmasters. 75 percent of inquiring information is going through Google. To design a site to make more traffic you have to give access to your site to Google. Otherwise, you’ll lose your opportunity to develop the site and Google could ban you. It is difficult to understand. Also nobody can explain on what conditions Google is basing their penalizing. Seems like Google doesn’t care about it.

9. We are waiting for the second Big Bang. With countless search results all over the world Google could blow up the current privacy of all internet users. Washington might be jealous of Google’s flexibility.

I wish all users would understand the influence of the results of their searches. I think that there are smart people in the world who can make a strong protected system with flexibility more than Google has. Every user would choose sources and referrals of his or her search. I suppose we have to think about our future today; otherwise, we’ll not have it. The Internet is a very powerful structure, but I hope we will manage it ourselves.

Development of the Internet creates discussions about it. New domain levels were introduced in usage. It brings a big impact to owners of trademarks and developers of sites.
After creating and evolving a new divisive plan by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (“ICANN”) in January 1, 2000 and the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy as part of it was accepted by many domain holders including Network Solutions Inc.. Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (“ACPA”) quickly covered the U.S. trademark law by its own significance. Every person working with the Web professionally should know all the nuances and issues in this area.
In the beginning, these two documents were introduced to prevent further violations during the registration and utilizing of domain names. In other words, a pending site has to have evidence of upright usage or “bad faith”. It means that a particular site doesn’t have permission to place a specific kind of information regarding a specific trade name.
The existence of bad faith is considered only on known fact. Charging another company with a violation, in most cases, always has a relation between trademark holder and owner of a domain name. Everybody has to register domain names according to both main documents.
Bad faith can be found in the following cases:
-    registration of a site with trade name with purpose to make profit from putting it on sale or give the right to use it for fee;
-    creating a domain name using a particular trademark name to limit the access to this site for owner of the trademark;
-    using a site to destroy undesirable business partners;
-    publication of the content on the site purposefully hiding the real goals of this site.
Anyway, existence of bad faith is a good reason to charge the creators of domain names. The only way to prove the right of usage of this domain name is to represent the fact of following the rules of aforementioned documents.
To protect the trademark its owner has to appeal to appropriate a judicial organization under the U.S. trademark law with any evidence of plagiarism: he or she can use as a proof any received benefit of opposite part from utilizing this site name. Unfortunately, this action consists of different limitations. Also the owner of the trademark can obtain help from arbitration organizations paying for their services. They can settle the problem by cancelling or transferring the domain name to the owner of the related trademark if they will find any undesirable or illegal purposes of using this site by the domain name holder.
There are divisive components of every particular case such as success in solving the problem and amount of time and resources spent on it.
Network Solutions Inc. can suspend running the site during the time it considers the issue. This action negatively influences the domain owner’s rights because of its illegality.
Companies such as NSI decided to changes the order of registration of a domain name. Now they can’t put the site “on hold”, but still have the right to delete, relocate or make changes on the domain if the appealing side will provide a document that proves rights of the owner of the site name and permission to make appropriate changes from arbitration organization and ICANN.
The trademark owners’ responsibility is to completely secure trade names from future violations of usage of these marks. Otherwise, an owner of a trademark might lose the control under his or her trade name.
Because there are so many levels of domain names, trademark owners are going through a difficult time defending their rights that raise the problem every moment. As an option, an owner of a trade name can create domain names on all introduced domain levels to protect him- or herself.
Nowadays, the Internet acts like a big corporation with complicated rules. A security force of regular people is sitting on their shoulder. Knowing the laws will help them to avoid many problems and keep all contracts in order.
Many celebrities are dealing with the same problem. For instance, Julia Roberts and Jimi Hendrix have cases according to inappropriate usage of their own names as domain names. One of the requirements in the case of Julia Roberts was that she had to have a registered trade name in the U.S. in addition to common law trademark rights. She didn’t have any registered trademarks. The usage of her name was called a “secondary meaning”. It means that people can relate the trade name (or person name) with domain name that was given by its owner. The information of named site let people think that this trademark and site content have an undoubted relationship. The judicial organization gave to Julia Roberts an appropriate trademark right. The administrative group didn’t find any illegality of this site content, but concluded that the site was created with purpose of selling to the actress as many other domain names by the same owner. The decision was to give the domain name to Julia Roberts, but the previous owner can still find an opportunity to bring it back.
Domain name “jimihedrix.com” was created as Jimi Hendrix Fan Club. An arbitration panel found another registered domain names by this owner such as “elvispresly.com”, etc.. The site was not a real Fan Club. It was using for selling site names. It would be harder to clarify the problem if the site were run as a true Fan Club. The site was returned to the trademark holder.
UDRP and ACRA definitely helped to cover the trademarks laws.
In the case of Falwell, the court didn’t have the right to return a Web site with his own name to Falwell. Because of difference between site place and location of Gary Cohn who used to post parodies to “Jerryfalwell.com” and “Jerryfallwell.com” the court could not claim infringement of the trademark law. Falwell had appealed to UDRP, but the organization didn’t find bad faith of the sites. Falwell appealed to federal district court again.
It is evident, that in the Falwell case the court was not right. Somebody has to avoid further Cohn posts.
The decision to return domain names to Julia Roberts and Jimi Hedrix was based on the fact of bad faith of using the sites. I suppose nobody can use my name to confuse the public with purpose of getting benefits from utilizing this name.

Better sooner than later: Republican from Maine, Senator Olympia Snowe and a Democrat from North Dakota, Senator Byron Dorgan got together their efforts and once again have put forth a measure aiming for Internet Neutrality, even though the bill was killed last year in the Senate.

            This bill has eliminated the power of the companies that have control to Internet access and gives more freedom to the consumers. This is exactly what Snowe meant in her speech.

            The point of the measure is that large companies like Verizon and AT&T should not have the power of deciding the order of “searches’ listings” based on the amount of money they invest.

            The heads of Verizon and AT&T and other large companies feel that they deserve preferential treatment on websites because they have spent a great deal of money on their infrastructures. This issue that wasn’t important resurfaces once again this year.

            Such famous and affluent people like actress Alyssa Milano and Vint Cerf, who was one of the people having begun the development of the Internet, along with the regular users of the Internet asking for Government’s involvement to prevent big Internet service providers from dictating their rules. All these people want to have free choice to use the Internet in different directions. There is another opinion that goes against such involvement of the Government: opposers assert that they don’t want to change anything because it might bind the hands of new solution. Nobody is breaking the rules, they also say.

            The proposed law of Sens. Olympia Snowe and Byron Dakota is going to help users who have to utilize the additional equipment to take care of their Internet connection: to protect or to strengthen the signal of it. Regular users wouldn’t be depending on any network operator limitation for the full access to the Internet.

            The bill argues that all types of consumers of Telecommunication companies shouldn’t pay any money for exercising use of the Internet while these companies organize information according to their needed priority. If one of the network operators suddenly wanted to create a specific line to provide the place for media materials, for example, this place must allow storing of all types of media of every Internet user around the world without the user paying a fee.

In addition, the Senators’ document warns that all providers of the dedicated Internet service have to give a chance to any user to buy its own independent high-speed access to the Internet. The Federal Communications Commission has to care about all inconsistencies according to the Senate re-emerged proposal that would appear during its introduction.

Unfortunately, the Senate and FCC have divisive opinions about AT&T regulations of the Net neutrality during their uniting with BellSouth. AT&T wanted to help to solve the problem with the consideration of the bill, but it still rejects the use of the Net neutrality as a guideline for its activity.

            The Republican Party didn’t consider the Net neutrality as a global set of rules they should follow. It was contrary to the opposite decision of two Republicans, Chairman Kevin Martin and Commissioner Deborah Taylor Tate, who are participating in the voting.

The new bill proposed by the two Senators Olympia Snowe and Byron Dorgan was rejected by telephone companies too soon. AT&T and Verizon were in the first row of the companies who didn’t agree with its rules.

            The president of the U.S. Telecom Association, Walter McCormick, argued about investing money for the idea of playing with the order of the information that network operators have. He was confident about the fact that people wouldn’t pay attention to this project because the Government would prohibit it. In his speech McCormick added that this interdiction would minimize the development of home services such as health programs, finance operations, entertaining and communicating solutions, etc.

Consumers’ unions received the opportunity of the re-emergence of the bill. Owing to the fact that six Democrats such as Sens. Barbara Boxer, John Kerry, Tom Harkin, Patrick Leahy, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama – but Snowe – invest their money to the campaign, the re-emergence became possible.

The member of the Consumers Union, Jeannine Kenney, was invited to the discussion. She reminded in the interview that this law proposal would be the beginning of the freedom of all Internet users of all levels of wealth. Free access to the Internet is giving to everybody the chance to get their own goals effectively.

            The attempt to pass the bill was made again by Democrats. They wanted to give equal rights for all kinds of users to have good access to the Internet. This year the bill is giving hope to meet appropriate requirements. 

The House of Representatives wants to show their version of Net neutrality that was rejected by Republicans last year, but nobody knows yet when it will happen.

I suppose the Government’s obligation is to help the people have everything they need, but not to go around in endless discussions about whether the Republicans’ bill or Democrats’ bill is meeting the Senate requirements. There are a lot of more important things such as gas prices and lack of oil needed for producing enough. I think that without the gas the price of electricity will go up. Scientists have to invent new sources of energy. This will lead to an increasing importance in the development of the Internet services and making them affordable for every type of user from movie stars to a regular truck driver. Otherwise, we would get a new revolution where people can show their power and get all they want by forcing the Government with their angry power.