[opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality
- From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 22:46:45 +0000
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
> So you are against the free market deals that exist today between large
> portals and ISPs, and CDNs and ISPs?
Making it easier for high volume sources to get their content into last mile
nets, while not impacting on other content, is not a problem. What is a problem
is "free market deals" that have ISPs throttle back certain content sources,
and at the same time not allow these content owners to install edge servers at
their expense, just so the ISP can extort an extra revenue stream.
> While Title II regulation could "level the playing field" by requiring
> the ISPs to offer identical services to any company, as the article I
> posted this morning with the AT&T position, AT&T noted that Title II
> actually protects these deals, and allows for different pricing even
> when the difference are small.
The way I read it, this was simply AT&T's attempt at pre-empting the Title II
threat. Like I already said, priority lanes already exist, Craig, in the form
of VPNs at the very least, or even in the form of spectrum taken up by MPEG-2
TS broadcast streams. "Differentiated services" have been a fact of life on the
Internet for years and years. Done right, no problem. It seems like you and the
FCC haven't been aware of this, is all.
> So we may agree that the real issue here is having two subscriptions -
> one for general IP traffic, and another for high QOS video and file
> transfer traffic.
No, actually. I wouldn't want it done that way, but it's technically possible,
sure. All I was saying is, the guy who bought telephone, broadband, and TV
service from the MVPD/ISP should be able to expect the same sort of service,
even if this ISP/MVPD suddenly switched to all-IP delivery. So it's only fair
to allow the MVPD/ISP to prioritize their own bundles, while still providing a
neutral broadband pipe to customers.
So *no*, I'm not saying that the ISP will force everyone to subscribe to their
"MVPD service" so they can access existing independent content such as Hulu,
Netflix, or cbs.com. Certainly not. What I am saying is that Hulu and Netflix
would be limited to whatever level of neutral broadband service the subscriber
signed up for, while the MVPD bundles might "always" be available in HD, if
that's what the TV subscriber was getting before the all-IP switch.
> You are talking about a single decision in an long running debate. I
> was talking about the general way that the oligopolies conduct their
> business, tying up the regulators by using the courts to slow walk
> the entire process...
I realize it's a "long running debate," but I think also that in this example,
and in all the previous ones, the nay-sayers enjoy twisting the truth. The
corporations involved will always try to tie things up in the courts. But your
contention that the FCC is in cohoots is usually unfounded. Clueless, maybe.
Even when you bring up examples from the past, Craig, as you know, I'm often
not convinced.
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:
