[opendtv] Re: FCC issues net neutrality rules in face of Congress and carriers
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 11:32:54 -0500
At 6:13 PM -0400 10/31/09, Albert Manfredi wrote:
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
Absolutely. They are using a network they own for
a proprietary paid service, they ARE NOT using the
Internet to deliver these bits.
Okay, so for this specific example, the IPTV VOD service, the net
neutrality rule would have to allow for segregation of traffic that
the ISP does not intend to send beyond the edges of his own
intranet. Let's see that sort of exception specified, then.
Why bother? The cable tiers are covered by separate regulation - they
have NOTHING to do with the broadband service.
Here's another issue. What about the ISP installing mirror servers
for the most popular sites used by his subscribers? Is that a valid
way for this ISP to differentiate himself, or should that be
forbidden? Or should he be made to install such mirrors for every
web site out there?
Other than the reality that this is already the case - i.e. most
digital media content is ALREADY served from mirror sites such as
Akamai, it is a good question. I see no reason why a cable company or
telco could not mirror Internet content locally without running afoul
of Net Neutrality rules. In this case they would be enhancing the
service, not degrading it. The net neutrality test would have to be
based on who controls the mirroring. If the mirroring algorithm is
driven by subscriber demand I doubt there would be a problem; if it
were driven by someone at the cable/telco ISP deciding what to
mirror, that could be a problem (i.e. favoring those they choose to
mirror over others).
When I hear the words "net neutrality" from the staunch advocates, I
equate the words to "family values," "carbon footprint," and "the
public option."
I would not put these in the same category.
For the past century it has been U.S. policy to treat utilities
(including the broadcast media) as "natural monopolies." There are
some very interesting books on the subject - let's just say that the
early 20th Century industrial barons recognized the value of
educating the politicians about the potential value to both of
regulating utilities.
For the past 100 years it has been assumed that monopolistic behavior
by those who are regulated is better than the chaos of competition in
these industries. It is difficult to change the attitude and or
behavior of the politicians and the regulated industries, especially
since they are such a critical funding source for the politicians -
this includes both utility taxes on the consumer and campaign
contributions from the regulated utilities.
So while it may seem strident for some to advocate that the Internet
not be regulate like existing utilities, or at all for that matter,
the position is very similar to that of our founders, who included
the concepts of copyrights and patents in our Constitution. The goal
then was the rapid proliferation of ideas into the public commons.
Tbe goal today is that the new public commons we call the Internet
should not be turned into a toll road or regulated in such a manner
as to favor those who seek regulation to maximize their profits.
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:
