Comments on: Net Neutrality and the telecom protection racket (Update 1)

By: jeran

jeran — Tue, 09 May 2006 03:28:17 +0000

The telecoms’ goal–other than the obvious one of increasing profit–is not to reduce the quality of service for those who pay the standard rates, but to offer increased quality for higher rates. Regulation by the government adds an unnecessary layer of complexity and could quite possibly inhibit development of newer and faster data transfer technologies. Consumers (along with Google, Microsoft, and the other major websites who have a stake in this) will prevent the telecoms from demanding too much. No government required.

By: keepitfree

keepitfree — Sun, 07 May 2006 22:56:13 +0000

Weldon,

What you say could just as easily be applied to government regulation of the business models that make the Interent thrive. The Internet has thrived precisely because our governmental official have exercised proper judgment by leaving it alone (e.g. the Internet tax proposal that came and went). Once we give them in inch, our legislators will begin to make election-promises as to how they are going to use the Internet. Soon, we have a government institution, instead of a relatively free flow of information. No thanks.

By: Weldon Berger

Weldon Berger — Thu, 04 May 2006 22:40:23 +0000

It’s a great deal more difficult to undo a faits accompli than to prevent them. This is a potential bonanza for telecoms and cable companies, which is why they’re throwing so much money at it, and unless it’s prohibited, they’ll do it.

By: pkp646

pkp646 — Thu, 04 May 2006 15:37:12 +0000

Paulaner01- No serious violation of net neutrality has occured and it is unlikely that it soon will. It would just be bad business if any ISP tried to block content.

By: Paulaner01

Paulaner01 — Tue, 02 May 2006 01:17:11 +0000

Has any of what you’re describing actually happened yet? I’m pretty sure it hasn’t. So why do we need legislation to remedy something that isn’t happening in the first place?