A Case for Non-Net-Neutrality

Posted by ryuzaki0 on Friday January 5, 2007 @09:48AM from the i-like-my-internets-biased dept.

boyko.at.netqos writes "Network Performance Daily has an in-depth interview with Professor Christopher Yoo from Vanderbilt University Law School on his opposition to Net-Neutrality policies. While some might disagree with his opinions, he lays out the case for non-neutrality in an informed and informative manner. From the interview: 'Akamai is able to provide service with lower latency and higher quality service, because they distribute the content. This provides greater protection against DoS attacks. It's a local storage solution instead of creating additional bandwidth, and it's a really interesting solution. Here's the rub ... Akamai is a commercial service and is only available to people who are willing to pay for it. If CNN.com pays for it, and MSNBC.com does not, CNN.com will get better service.'"

2 of 345 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

invalid analogy by Anonymous Coward · 2007-01-05 09:51 · Score: 5, Insightful

Akamai is a distributed hosting service, not a common carrier.

This guy is seriously a professor?
1. Re:invalid analogy by DragonWriter · 2007-01-05 10:00 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Akamai is a distributed hosting service, not a common carrier.
  
  This guy is seriously a professor?
  
  He is a law professor that's an opponent of neutrality. Whether his distortions of the technology are because he knows the law better than the technology, or because he is expounding an ideologically-based viewpoint and trying to snow people over with FUD, or because of some other reasons is, I suppose, something you'll need to form your own opinion about.