tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19495135.post114543354559106852..comments2023-09-28T08:06:51.944-04:00Comments on Jeff Kaplan - Open ePolicy: The Case for Net Neutrality -- Part 2Jeffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13605638934971853164noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19495135.post-1148218049824739072006-05-21T09:27:00.000-04:002006-05-21T09:27:00.000-04:00Readers of this comment thread should know that le...Readers of this comment thread should know that lessgov and pkp646 are part of a tag-team of industry shills who invade blog comments on net neutrality to argue against any government regulation of the telephone companies. Other names who run with this crowd are John Rice, oldhats, AJ Carey and Paulaner01. (Google any of these names in combination and you'll see how their game works).<BR/><BR/>By tag-teaming the blogs, this small handful of individuals gives the false impression of broad popular support for an industry-friendly position.<BR/><BR/>What they fail to point out is that Net Neutrality has been the rule that has governed access to the Internet since its inception. It's the reason that the Internet has become such a dynamic force for new ideas, economic innovation and free speech. What they really want is for Congress to radically re-write our telecommunications laws so that companies like AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth can swoop in and become gatekeepers to Internet content -- in a way that benefits no one except the largest ISPs.<BR/><BR/>I'd like these people to tell us how it is that they appear together (usually one after the other) spouting identical industry talking points. <BR/><BR/>What gives fellas? Are you being paid to do this? And by whom?<BR/><BR/>Best I can tell it's Verizon money that's behind this deception.Timothy Karrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18428218526755405762noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19495135.post-1145968485987468442006-04-25T08:34:00.000-04:002006-04-25T08:34:00.000-04:00The status of the FCC's ongoing role in net neutra...The status of the FCC's ongoing role in net neutrality is one of the big issues. The telecom bill, as currently formulated, ties the FCC's hand to some extent. It has been able to "adjudicate" when a carrier blocks delivery of service from a provider. The case regarding Vonage's VoIP was one example.<BR/><BR/>However, as new tiered broadband rolls out, the FCC will be prevented from considering any policy changes to ensure net neutrality. And it is not clear that case-by-case adjudication is effective or wise if internet-wide issues arise.<BR/><BR/>I'll give you one example. Let's say it remains the policy that telecos/cable cannot impair delivery of any content/services (that's an assumption because right now that "policy" rests on the verbal assurances of teleco and cable execuatives -- current FCC does not stop them from degrading someone else's services). <BR/><BR/>As those companies begin their tiered broadband services, suppose content providers start complaining of impaired delivery of their services. <BR/><BR/>The FCC may be unable to issue any fines (because no policy exists) and it will be unable to issue a rule providing clarity on what constitutes "impaired" service and what does not. It will be unable to provide a clear rule for all to follow. To fix any such problem, the issue will have to go back to Congress and run through the full legislative process.<BR/><BR/>In legal terms, it's the equivalent of living entirely under a "common law" system where everything is done case-by-case, and no broadly applied laws/regulations/rules exist. Inefficient and overly rigid for the world to follow.<BR/><BR/>This is the precisely why Congress gives agencies regulatory powers because they are best-placed to issue more specific rules and respond flexibly as problems arise. And it's exactly why people like Reed Hundt, former FCC Chairman, argue that prohibiting the FCC from performing such a role is a bad idea.Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13605638934971853164noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19495135.post-1145873696044042182006-04-24T06:14:00.000-04:002006-04-24T06:14:00.000-04:00Jeff, Doesn't current FCC authority allow them to ...Jeff, Doesn't current FCC authority allow them to step in when the situation is "ripe?"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19495135.post-1145858438737797792006-04-24T02:00:00.000-04:002006-04-24T02:00:00.000-04:00It is true that only one violation of net neutrali...It is true that only one violation of net neutrality has been documented (I think a VoIP company was blocked at one point). And one violation does not necessarily make a big problem. <BR/><BR/>However, telcos and cable CEOs have been explicit on their intentions to begin tiering Internet access and discriminating (admittedly this is a loaded word) between types of content. So maybe not so hypothetical.<BR/><BR/>I do favor allowing the FCC to step in when the situation is ripe, and not hamstringing it from the start, as Congress currently proposes to do.Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13605638934971853164noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19495135.post-1145835875325176042006-04-23T19:44:00.000-04:002006-04-23T19:44:00.000-04:00Have the principles of net neutrality been violate...Have the principles of net neutrality been violated? Aren't we really talking about a hypothetical problem that may, or may not, manifest itself in a myriad of ways? Shouldn't legislation wait at least until there is a real problem to solve?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19495135.post-1145718092049928432006-04-22T11:01:00.000-04:002006-04-22T11:01:00.000-04:00You're right that cable and internet are, to date,...You're right that cable and internet are, to date, very different industries with different structures.<BR/><BR/>One question is: as cable companies exert more direct influence over the evolution and business of internet service delivery, what impact will that have on the structure of the Internet (on accessibility of different kinds of content and among different content providers?<BR/><BR/>It's hard to believe that increasing the leverage of these gov-created monopolies (and their pricing and business models) will not have an effect.Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13605638934971853164noreply@blogger.com