Re: Court Tosses FCC's 'Net Neutrality' Rules
Simeon Miteff <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.org.operators.ioz |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 15 Jan 2014, at 3:49 PM, Graham Leggett <[email protected]> wrote: > On 15 Jan 2014, at 3:01 PM, Calvin Browne <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I think (and I stress think) that net neutrality = rights expropriation. >> >> What next will you be forced to do on your network? > > I think net neutrality is important for the consumer, so that "internet access" doesn't start having a wooly definition that is dramatically different between providers. Think "internet access" compared to "internet access minus voice protocols" or "internet access minus Netflix". No, actually already does have a wooly definition, too late dude :-) ISPs currently charge their eyeball customers more for special QoS, and this is not just in the high end enterprise market, the same applies to DSL. Even worse, they definitely apply QoS by content class and I would not be surprised if some ISPs shape per content provider, so as far as the consumer is concerned, the net neutrality ship has already sailed. At this point, the argument is about preventing the ISP from doing the same to content providers. _______________________________________________ IOZ mailing list [email protected] http://lists.internet.org.za/mailman/listinfo/ioz