I think there are few examples of neutrality...maybe only Switzerland! This net neutrality issue is like most complex telco/techno issues - you can't be certain who's on what side, why, or who might benefit.
Certainly this is a bill about corporations vs. corporations. This is really not about "consumers". On one side is the delivery (i.e. Comcast) and the other side is the content (i.e. Yahoo). Classic confrontation between the dichotomy of Internet functions.
Both sides have arguments. The deliverers say they cannot reach every man, woman, and child with bandwidth unless they have some exclusivity (monopoly) and legislation that deters competition. So, for example, it would be difficult to take some of the huge pile of cash they make from providing bandwidth to Philadelphia and build basic infrastructure to middle-nowhere-PA.
The content providers, on the other hand, make themselves out as "for the consumer". This isn't really the case. It just means that content providers would be free from deliverers in terms of how they reach the end user. There certainly is a real fear that Verizon or Comcast might discriminate against Google or Amazon. But over-regulation is not the answer, either.
We'll see where it goes from here.
2 comments:
Rolfe,
Do you have a website or link for Hands Off the Internet? It sounds like a great organization.
I think many people would agree that the only way consumers are truly represented is when an organization (special interest) brings an issue to the legislature or a news event raises the consciousness of the legislature (like Megan's Law).
Maybe someone can offer another example, but it seems that consumer issues only succeed when grass roots organizations take the issue to Congress.
Post a Comment