[opendtv] Re: FCC rolls back net neutrality ISP transparency rules | InfoWorld
- From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 02:17:54 +0000
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
Unlicensed spectrum is difficult to monopolize.
There could be a simple rule, that those who have licensed spectrum cannot also
hog unlicensed spectrum, and charge for its use. After all, we have had
spectrum assigned for public use, such as the citizens band, for decades. Are
we also going to allow licensed users to grab those bands? It might have been
enough to forbid charging for the use of LTE-U spectrum. That alone might have
dissuaded this spectrum grab.
Auctioning spectrum tends
Irrelevant to this question. No one auctioned off WiFi spectrum. This was a
grab, pure and simple, by companies that already have licensed spectrum
dedicated to their own use only.
Just for the record, the Title II decision was a HUGE WINDFALL for
the Cable industry...
Oh super. Then they can stop complaining about it.
The Title II decision was a huge land grab by the government based
on a false premise - that companies were circumventing Net Neutrality,
and the only solution was FCC regulation of the Internet.
There are two possible threats here. One is that "the government" is sending
"black helicopters" to "regulate the Internet" in every neighborhood. You know,
monitoring what sites you're browsing, shutting off service if they notice
anything they don't like. This is paranoid-think of bone-heads.
The other is that local monopolies, the ones currently providing broadband
service, abuse their monopoly power, disrupting Internet sites that might
compete against their own walled-in sites or services. After all, the companies
we're talking about are well-versed in walled-in services. That's how they grew
up. This scenario is hardly paranoid-think, and it occurred as soon as the
opportunity arose. And even you can't deny the idiocy of the timing. Just as
the FCC was debating the neutrality issue, wouldn't you know that the "special
interests" decided it was time to play silly-ass games with neutrality of
Internet service? If nothing else, what the politicos call "the optics" were
really bad. How dumb can one be?
You keep missing the point here Bert. Cellular and WiFI are
converging. The ability to hand off a session to WiFI is a huge
win for the consumer, who is paying for cellular bits.
Amazing how Craig has **completely** missed the boat here, even after it was
explained.
OF COURSE WiFi offload is a boon to consumers, Craig! But what do you think
this LTE-U spectrum grab is designed to do? With LTE-U, that WiFi offload WILL
NOT OCCUR, when LTE-U base stations are available. So, let's say in public
venues, where you might use WiFi offload now, the telco installs LTE-U base
stations. First of all, that will eat into the spectrum available for WiFi. And
secondly, the telco will charge you for all those bits, as if you're in a
macrocell.
You should be asking yourself, with WiFi offload, who the heck needs LTE-U? And
the answer is, the special interests. Not the consumer.
Now do you get the problem?
Bert
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
