3 ms·

I'm not saying the telecoms should be allowed to block or punitively degrade a company like Skype. I'd be okay with a "no discrimination policy." The telecom sh

I'm not saying the telecoms should be allowed to block or punitively degrade a company like Skype. I'd be okay with a "no discrimination policy." The telecom shouldn't be able to charge Skype more than it charges Conde Nast. And of course Antitrust law would still exist. Blocking Skype for anti-competitive actions is already illegal. But I don't have a problem with them paying for priority. That happens in virtually all industries. Amazon pays for faster shipping than a small webstore can afford. McDonalds can afford a better location than a mom and pop burger store. It's just part of competition. Sure its not ideal for start ups, but why should you have the right to make a law to tell Comcast how to use their network just so it benefits your start up? Start up culture doesn't seem like regulation itself (Air B&B, Uber). And it might actually benefit web start ups. If Netflix and Amazon pump in more cash to telecoms in exchange for faster service, that means the telecoms will build faster networks to make more money.

a_c_s 12y ago
Net neutrality is the non-discrimination policy you want. It is also what has existed since the internet began. Anti-trust doesn't help small companies when they go out of business before they can afford a decade-long court battle with a telecom. It also doesn't help if whole industries (VOIP, video streaming) are targeted. "And it might actually benefit web start ups. If Netflix and Amazon pump in more cash to telecoms in exchange for faster service, that means the telecoms will build faster networks to make more money." Or, given past US telecom behavior, they just shift more of their existing infrastructure to supporting the 'fast lanes', degrading performance for everyone else (which further incentivizes companies to pay for fast lanes) and enjoy larger profit margins. (Remember, most telecoms are in non-competitive markets, so they have little incentive to compete.)

a_c_s 12y ago

Net neutrality is the non-discrimination policy you want. It is also what has existed since the internet began. Anti-trust doesn't help small companies when they go out of business before they can afford a decade-long court battle with a telecom. It also doesn't help if whole industries (VOIP, video streaming) are targeted. "And it might actually benefit web start ups. If Netflix and Amazon pump in more cash to telecoms in exchange for faster service, that means the telecoms will build faster networks to make more money." Or, given past US telecom behavior, they just shift more of their existing infrastructure to supporting the 'fast lanes', degrading performance for everyone else (which further incentivizes companies to pay for fast lanes) and enjoy larger profit margins. (Remember, most telecoms are in non-competitive markets, so they have little incentive to compete.)