The Net Neutraility Debate - Should ISPs have that much power?
Senator John McCain introduced a bill in the Senate last week, named the Internet Freedom Act of 2009, that would effectively allow Internet service providers to slow down or block Internet content or applications of their choosing.
The move came the same day Federal Communications Commission (FCC) decided to move forward on an official Net neutrality policy that would prevent ISPs from making those types of decisions.
The so-called Net neutrality debate has pitted Internet application companies, such as Google, Facebook and Skype, against big broadband providers, such as AT&T, Verizon Communications, and Comcast. The network operators argue regulation will stifle innovation, while the Internet companies say an unfettered network is necessary to encourage innovation.
My question to you: Do you think internet service providers should have the power to slow down or block Internet content or applications of their choosing?
full cnn article
The move came the same day Federal Communications Commission (FCC) decided to move forward on an official Net neutrality policy that would prevent ISPs from making those types of decisions.
The so-called Net neutrality debate has pitted Internet application companies, such as Google, Facebook and Skype, against big broadband providers, such as AT&T, Verizon Communications, and Comcast. The network operators argue regulation will stifle innovation, while the Internet companies say an unfettered network is necessary to encourage innovation.
My question to you: Do you think internet service providers should have the power to slow down or block Internet content or applications of their choosing?
full cnn article
Tags: debate, fcc, isps, net neutraility
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Eugene on -
Again, thanks for your thorough response. You bring up some great points that I've never thought about...
-
Permalink Reply by K Mears on -
I have to agree with your point about wireless tech. I also have to wonder if the technology will develop and be made available if the FCC locks down the market like it did for TV, Radio and even cell phones. We have seen that corporations have the willingness to simply sit pat with a system that is profitable, provided they can protect their turf in other ways. The US automobile corporations were not blind to the need for fuel efficiency, they simply didn't need to spend the R & D to bring it on line until foreign competition began to get serious. Even then the first line of defense was to start a "buy American" campaign, in an attempt to shift market demand instead of responding to it.
Even with the recent developments in cell phone technology, our nation has long had notoriously lousy service when compared to most other developed countries. Despite that, look what it took to get the rash of new services that recently were made available (think iPhone). Most of those 'new' services and products had been on customer wish lists for almost a decade before the dam broke. If Cingular hadn't bought into the iPhone, would that flood of copy cat devices and services have materialized? I doubt it. The complacent providers could have remained deaf to market demand another few years.
With telcos, the same dynamic has the potential to stifle the development of really effective net technologies. Given a bit of time, and with the usual kind of government regulation hamstringing competition, I imagine the telcos could delay the need to implement new technology almost indefinitely. After all, it would soon be like every other communications environment in this country - a tiny number of colluding moguls in a government protected private game.
© 2009 Created by alice
