4 ms·
The thing that bugs me is common carrier. Once you start discriminating traffic, you’re not common carrier. You should lose those protections.
by jfoutz 9y ago
The thing that bugs me is common carrier. Once you start discriminating traffic, you’re not common carrier. You should lose those protections.
- PaulRobinson 9y agoYou pay more for non-local calls than local calls. You pay more for international call than for domestic calls. This does not break "common carrier". They can argue this is now just being applied to the data packets.
- rahimnathwani 9y agoI agree with you, but AIUI the US legislation about common carriers covers discrimination between customers, not between types of content. So you couldn't, for example, charge rich people more than poor people, for the same service. You also couldn't charge people of Indian descent more than you charge caucasians. What I'd like to understand, though, is: what if an ISP provides customers with more reliable connectivity to HBO (due to payment of a fee), than they provide to an equivalent Hindi-language broadcaster (because they can't afford or don't want to pay such a fee)? Can the latter's customers claim that the ISP is discriminating against them?