Net Neutrality Stuck In Reverse Gear
| Thursday, September 06, 2007 | Steven Andrés |
Today the U.S. Dept of Justice released a statement that states ISP's should be allowed to charge a fee for "priority" web traffic (see Associated Press story).
So as not to spin off tangentially into an argument about why DoJ issued a statement that has more to do with telco lobbying than about justice, I'd like to just limit comments and discussions to the pro/con of Net Neutrality. To me, a die-hard network infrastructure junkie, I can see grains of truth in both sides of the argument.
My heart tells me to support Neutrality--the Internet is based on the egalitarian concept of everyone (no matter how wealthy) having equal access to information. My brain tells me that certainly we should be prioritizing some traffic (VoIP) and slowing down other traffic (SPAM). This brings me to another part of my anatomy: my gut. Unfortunately, my gut is telling me that although my brain has a good point, the way this will be corrupted by evil telco's is that a new batch of fat-bandwidth DoubleClick.net video adverts ("business" premiere customer) will be prioritized and my email to grandma will be delayed (since I'm only a lowly "residential" customer).
Anyone else having these conversations with parts of their body?
My foot is telling me, "Stomp these ISPs out". The Washington Post reported today that Comcast is taking a page out of Sprint's customer service book and is terminating service to "bandwidth hogs". Bandwidth is and will continue to be an issue, due to increases in usage and quality of online media. QOS, compression, and bandwidth management are all elements of a solution, but this does not absolve ISPs from the need to rearchitect their networks to eliminate bottle necks and improve lagging speeds in the US. (http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/Images/commentarynews/broadbandspeedchart.jpg)
They can charge when they are setting the example.
With my favorite life motto being 'outsource it', I am always willing to pay a premium for higher quality services. The emphasis being 'higher quality'. The fact that I am willing to pay more should not impact the service levels for the masses. If I decide to pay for a 1st class airline ticket it should not dimish the quality of the economy class.
IOW, if the ISP keeps the same quality of service for all of its subscribers and offers even better "premium" service for those willing to pay, well -- why should we care? Of course I expense all of these things so I guess I really don't care too much.