NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad

NNSquad Home Page

NNSquad Mailing List Information

 


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[ NNSquad ] Re: IncumbentNet EU says no to Net Neutrality, would rather believe in Competition. Is Net Neutrality such a bad idea?


At core what we see here -- and compare this to Genachoski's FCC here
in the States, too -- is the transformation of the legal apparatus to
reflect the establishment of an IncumbentNet.  This is the general
tendency exhibited in propositions that say let's set a more narrowly
tailored set of rules (i.e., the "third way") -- they basically are
designed to tell *the incumbents* what to do -- not really *what
communications and/or communications policy is about.* (Note also that
this is perfectly manageable by -- if only because it reflects a
*being managed into place by* -- the incumbents).


Seth

On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 1:06 PM, Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello Lauren,
> Neelie Kroes, the commissioner for the E.U.’s digital agenda, said in a
> speech in Brussels that European nations will NOT introduce net neutrality
> rules to prevent Internet network companies from blocking or prioritizing
> certain content. EU would instead rely on guidelines that would stop
> anticompetitive behavior by telecom and cable firms and protect consumers.
>
> http://voices.washingtonpost.com/posttech/2010/11/eu_wont_adopt_net_neutrality_l.html?wpisrc=nl_techE.U
> I posted this development as a question on LinkedIn and it has drawn some
> interesting responses:
> http://www.linkedin.com/answers/government-non-profit/government-policy/GOV_GPO/752106-17150723?goback=.ahp
> There are strong arguments in support of EU's decision, posted in response
> to the question publicly, and some in private. One observation in favour of
> this position by EU is that it is responding to extreme [usage patterns and]
> 'behaviours' among a class of Internet Users. Another comment is that Net
> Neutrality "would lead to massive hijacking of the available resource by
> certain content types which would harm the overall use of the net."
> But my concern is this:  This precedent of indiscriminately following
> telecom policy on content discrimination and user differentiation would
> eventually lead to a situation where Internet becomes far more
> commercialized in tune with the telecom / cable model, at which point
> Internet would cease to be what it is.
> A comment on Washington Post is more interesting:  "If a carrier were to
> block Skype, a service Kroes said she uses to call family back home,
> consumers would protest." - the problem with this statement is what happens
> if traffic is blocked for a more marginal service that competes with Skype?
> Customers won't complain and the network operator gets away with it. Take
> that a step further, where you have a company like Skype, Google, Yahoo, or
> Microsoft who cut deals with providers or network carriers to "favor" their
> traffic over others. In a competitive broadband market, with several
> choices, competition may prevent such behavior. But most markets don't have
> competitive broadband. It's in these markets, where without net neutrality,
> people have to take what they get and get hosed in the process."
> Would the Net Neutrality proponents agree with any or part of the arguments
> in support of the EU postion?
> Sivasubramanian M
>
> http://www.isocmadras.com
> facebook: http://is.gd/x8Sh
> LinkedIn: http://is.gd/x8U6
> Twitter: http://is.gd/x8Vz
>
>
>