Running in Net Neutral

Isn't that how markets work?

Bobguz

Well actually no, this is not how 'free markets' work. This is how 'captive markets' work. For ISPs to create a 'fast lane' for their preferred content providers (for something in exchange no doubt) this becomes a 'combination in restraint of trade', an anti-trust violation.

Since the creation of the internet was (as Al Gore infamously pointed out) at least in part funded by government (all of us taxpayers), it should not be treated as private property. Back in the late 1800's, the railroads used multi-tiered pricing to gouge the small farmers sending their crops to market. In a very similar way, railroads were a public/private enterprise, with the government footing the bill in the form of huge land grants and other subsidies to the private railroad companies. Since however the railroads were vastly profitable, they had plenty of money to spread around in Washington and as a result they pretty much owned the government and they got their way.

Likewise the large business interests behind the push to seize control of the internet have very deep pockets and many good friends in Washington. I suspect they have a good chance of success, and the millions of small business (farmers) who rely on the internet will get screwed. But again this is not how 'markets' work - this is how fascism (small f) works.

Unfortunately it is also the way socialism [small 's'] works too, as the government will get its share in taxes and control. ISP's are businesses and do have to make a profit for services rendered. How they do it is the question.

<this is not how 'free markets' work. This is how 'captive markets' work. For ISPs to create a 'fast lane' for their preferred content providers (for something in exchange no doubt) this becomes a 'combination in restraint of trade'>

I don't agree. Tiered service or acquisition is quite common. EXAMPLES: Store label vs Designer label items all at Sears; Full service brokers vs No service brokerage all at Schwab; etc. It's the ads that have driven the growth of the ISPs and the internet. The advertisers pay more for better positioning. Newspapers, television and radio do the same. That's the way advertising works and the internet runs on advertising.

Bobguz

The first thing to remember that the government ALWAYS uses DoubleSpeak when naming legislation. "Internet Freedom" should be read as "Government Control over Content" and "Nondiscrimination" as "politically correct"- only thoughts in line with official policy allowed. ANY legislation targeting the Internet is inherently bad. Let it evolve on its own...

< ANY legislation targeting the Internet is inherently bad. Let it evolve on its own...>

Yeah, like TV and radio.

Bobguz

General rules which treat everyone equally and do not restrict freedom of speech and content may be needed, just as in TV and radio power and frequencies and times to reduce power can be regulated. The copyright decisions are just crazy.

The extremely unfair "Fairness Doctrine" [purposely misnamed] is an example of the type of regulation that is not needed.

How to maintain the innovation and competition of the early days of the Internet is the challenge. Internet technology itself accelerates consolidation of ownership, leading to fewer folks providing the broadband infrastructure.

Not sure if what happened to railroad ownership in the US in the early 1900's is a parallel, but I think we should look to the past (both in the US and abroad) for lessons-learned from analogous precedents.

The hands-off approach of governments across the planet for the past 15 years or so has been wise, but it's not clear if this is possible moving forward.

Opinions from folks like the musician "Moby", from the leadership at Time-Warner cable (RoadRunner ISP), and from their equivalents across industry, should be considered.

Hopefully, a "do-no-evil" attitude will prevail, and the diversity of the web will be maintained.

- April05

If I read this right, that means websites that get less traffic, get less priority.

That could be tough for teachers who host their own media rich websites, many at a personal cost, as an added resource for students.

Obviously, mostly people in a given district would visit a site like that, which means that traffic is limited, mostly, to a very specific demographic.

I certainly wouldn't like my site slowing down. With only 5,000-10,000 hits a year, I am not a large volume site by any measure.

LMAO there is already the fast lane, if you look at various packet types VOIP packets h323 it gets prority over less time sensitive data...