Everyone take a moment to enjoy the last night of the open internet
Google and Verizon pretty much wrote the laws they wanted.
I am dismayed, but not surprised. We all knew it was coming. Where the hell is shrill republican obstructionism when you need it?!
Al Franken has been very outspoken in his opposition to the proposed rule-making. Here's his HuffPost piece from this morning
After all, just look at Comcast -- this Internet monolith has reportedly imposed a new, recurring fee on Level 3 Communications, the company slated to be the primary online delivery provider for Netflix. That's the same Netflix that represents Comcast's biggest competition in video services.
Imagine if Comcast customers couldn't watch Netflix, but were limited only to Comcast's Video On Demand service. Imagine if a cable news network could get its website to load faster on your computer than your favorite local political blog. Imagine if big corporations with their own agenda could decide who wins or loses online. The Internet as we know it would cease to exist.
Just a week before the FCC holds a vote on whether to apply fairness rules to some of the nation’s internet service providers, two companies that sell their services to the country’s largest cellular companies showed off a different vision of the future: one where you’ll have to pay extra to watch YouTube or use Facebook.
The companies, Allot Communications and Openet — suppliers to large wireless companies including AT&T and Verizon — showed off a new product in a web seminar Tuesday, which included a PowerPoint presentation (1.5-MB .pdf) that was sent to Wired by a trusted source.
The idea? Make it possible for your wireless provider to monitor everything you do online and charge you extra for using Facebook, Skype or Netflix. For instance, in the seventh slide of the above PowerPoint, a Vodafone user would be charged two cents per MB for using Facebook, three euros a month to use Skype and $0.50 monthly for a speed-limited version of YouTube. But traffic to Vodafone’s services would be free, allowing the mobile carrier to create video services that could undercut NetFlix on price.
I am Canadian. Does this concern me, and if so, how?
You will pay even more for access to the public Internet than you did yesterday. Some parts of the Internet will cost more than others, at the discretion of your local Internet service monopolies.
It's a pendulum, folks...
The infrastructure got better, service got better, prices got cheaper... I remember my wife being amazed that my playing chess with someone in Sweden wasn't costing me money...
But.. someone has to pay the piper eventually..
They're not literally adopting the "Google/Verizon Plan" are they? I mean, Google and Verizon aren't literally writing the rules--that's just how it's being spun, I think. I'm pretty sure the FCC writes its own rules.
HuronBob: I hate that it might cost me what it's worth to use the net, but, it doesn't seem unfair...
Well, I know that, but in this case, I didn't think the FCC were literally adopting rules drafted by Google/Verizon. Is that what they're doing, or is that an exaggeration?
Multiple sources have told National Journal that Verizon, the nation's second largest telecommunications carrier, may seek to overturn the historic open Internet rules to be approved by the Federal Communications Commission Tuesday morning. Sources said the option is on the table, but cautioned that no final decision has been made.
One new item that was not previously disclosed: mobile wireless providers can't block "applications that compete with the provider's" own voice or video telephony services. By including that rule, the FCC effectively sided with Skype over wireless carriers.
People keep saying things like this, but the 'awesomely level playing field' of the last 15 years was created with practically no regulations whatsoever, and 'net neutrality' would be a change to that level playing field.
« Older Sex on Mars | Holidays on Ice—or—Oh, Deer Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments