Net Neutrality
“Imagine if you tried to order a pizza and the phone company said AT&T’s preferred pizza vendor is Domino’s. Press one to connect to Domino’s now. If you would still like to order from your neighborhood pizzeria, please hold for three minutes while Domino’s guaranteed orders are placed.”
-Craig Newmark
June 22nd, 2007 at 11:06 am
Despite this claim being tossed around the internet for a while now I have yet to read actual proof, aka facts, that would warrant this for consideration as even remotely possible scenario. I work on this issue with the Hands Off the Internet coalition.
Consumers wouldn’t stand for this as as my coalition recently noted in a filing made with the FCC,
“Current regulation and consumer protection laws are sufficient to address any potential harms, which have been greatly exaggerated by those advocating net neutrality regulation,’ the filing notes, adding, ‘The FCC already has the authority and jurisdiction it requires to intervene if in the future a broadband provider engages in a practice that is deemed harmful to consumers or in anyway adversely impacts net neutrality.”
This is a sentiment shared by mane including Carnegie Mellon Professor and “Godfather of the Internet” David Farber along with Michael Katz, Chief Economist at the FCC during the Clinton Administration.
“Public policy should intervene where anti-competitive actions can be identified and the cure will not be worse than the disease. Policymakers must tread carefully, however, because it can be difficult, if not impossible, to determine in advance whether a particular practice promotes or harms competition. Antitrust law generally takes a case-by-case approach under which private parties or public agencies can challenge business practices and the courts require proof of harm to competition before declaring a practice illegal. This is a sound approach that has served our economy well.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/18/AR2007011801508.html
Preemptive “net neutrality” regulations based on hypothetical scenarios is not sound policy and does nothing for consumers and where the focus should be placed; in increasing broadband deployment and development of the next generation internet. Thanks.
August 1st, 2007 at 12:21 pm
[…] I saw on Dan’s blog, which got a long comment from […]
August 1st, 2007 at 12:34 pm
Well, I certainly respect the fact that you know a lot more about this issue than I, but I think you have too much faith in the government’s desire and ability to do what benefits consumers, instead of what benefits the large corporate interests that it is, by and large, beholden to. If we can somehow convince Congress to preemptively block anti-consumer practices now, before they figure out how much money is in it for them if they let the telcos bend us over even farther, it might make it that much harder for them to reverse their decision later.
Or maybe it won’t, and this is all futile. To be honest, I’m going with choice “B”, us little guys getting screwed in every hole no matter what happens, which is why I can’t summon up the motivation to personally engage this issue more deeply than posting this comment. Gods, being a misanthropist paranoid crank is tiring…
August 1st, 2007 at 2:50 pm
Rob, are you directing your comment to HOTI or to Dan? If to HOTI, then keep in mind that he’s paid by these guys to “know a lot more about this issue”: http://www.handsoff.org/blog/member-organizations
August 6th, 2007 at 2:46 am
Why am I not surprised? :)
August 27th, 2007 at 9:26 am
[…] this candidate on interandom .. Carnegie Mellon Professor and “Godfather of the Internet” David […]