[opendtv] Re: ACA: Net Rules Fail Unless Applied To Edge Providers | Multichannel
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 08:10:50 -0400
On Jul 25, 2014, at 6:51 PM, "Manfredi, Albert E"
<albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Not nearly as essential, since everyone should have access to multiple search
> engines, but it's a point. Or, the TV networks take matters in their own
> hands, e.g. as some of them did when GoogleTV got all the unnecessary hype
> from the press. "Oh yeah? Watch this!"
Not essential?
I think we would all agree that it is wrong for an ISP to block access to a web
site.
I think is is just as wrong for a web site to block access to specific devices
or to a group of consumers caught up in a carriage dispute.
If an ISP limits the QOS of a web service you can still use the service,
although repeated re buffering does interfere with the utility of a streaming
video service.
The search engine issue is interesting. Obviously, Google and others sell
preferred search placement. I suppose this is just "good business." If,
however, they INTENTIONALLY do not list a search result, or demote it to the
100th page of search results, that may be a problem. Especially if the site is
competitive with a service operated by the company operating the search engine.
> Consumers don't need to become enslaved to just one search engine, and
> equipment manufacturers don't limit the choice either. Somewhat related to
> this would be the controversy over choice of web browser for Windows, so it's
> hardly something new the government *has* to step in to control. People have
> already made their views clear, and the manufacturers have taken these into
> account.
Correct. We do not need new laws or regulations to control anti-competitive
behavior. And we do not need laws and regulations that permit anti-competitive
behavior. Unfortunately the latter is exactly what has happened in the TV
industry.
We have all kinds of rule that protect certain content franchises, like NFL
blackout rules. And the regulators and anti-trust enforcers appear to have no
problem with the anti-competitive "tying" that is the core power of the MVPD
bundle.
> On the other hand, a local monopoly for broadband access is not something
> that consumers can control on their own. In spite of what Commissioner Pai
> might say, the broadband companies have already been playing these games,
> because of their conflict of interest. Were it not for the controversy
> Comcast stirred wrt Netflix, and then others seemed quick to emulate, the
> recent wailing would never have occurred.
And you think regulating the ISP oligopoly using Title II is going to change
this?
How naive. It will entrench the bad behavior and allow the oligopoly to expand
the practice of charging for improved interconnection and improved QOS.
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
