Slashdot Mirror


NYTimes Editorial Board: The FCC Wants To Let Telecoms Cash In on the Internet (nytimes.com)

The New York Times' Editorial Board writes: The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission wants to let Comcast, Verizon and other broadband companies turn the internet into a latter-day version of cable TV, in which they decide what customers can watch and how much they pay for that content. That's essentially what would happen under the proposal by the chairman, Ajit Pai, to abandon the commission's network neutrality rules, which prevent telecom companies from interfering with how their customers use the internet. Net neutrality prevents those companies from having companies like Amazon pay a fee to get their content delivered more quickly than their rivals', and from having the firms throttle other services and websites, even blocking customer access to, say, Netflix or an online newspaper. Under Mr. Pai's proposal, telecom companies would effectively be allowed to sell you a basic internet plan that might include only limited access to Google and email. For Facebook and Twitter you might need a slightly more expensive deluxe plan. The premium plan might include access to Netflix and Amazon. Oh, and by the way, media businesses eager to gain more users could pay broadband companies to be included in their enhanced basic or deluxe plans. Further reading: Associated Press fact check: Net-neutrality claims leave out key context; The death of the Internet.

5 of 268 comments (clear)

  1. Worse idea EVER. by olsmeister · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This model smacks of 1990's style thinking.
    Do they think Amazon and Google won't start building out their own 'internets'? Do they think that this type of fragmentation and duplication of efforts would be anything but harmful for consumers?
    This isn't free market capitalism. This is crony capitalism.

    1. Re:Worse idea EVER. by Shatrat · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The technology to do real-time deep packet inspection is getting more and more mature. It's possible now for ISPs, if they spend the money, to differentiate P2P, Video, Gaming, VOIP et cetera type traffic in real time using rules more sophisticated than simple IP filters. It is a big investment to install the equipment and software to implement, so the ISPs want to make sure there will be no legal challenges before they start rolling it out any more blatantly.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  2. Re:I Appreciate the NYT Chiming in on This by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You're confusing toll roads with member-only access to a building.

    If NYTimes requires people to pay to view their articles, it's their business.
    But without net neutrality, it would give that power to the ISPs and completely fragment and destroy American's internet access.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  3. if they want to have to police it.... by sckeener · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Personally if I was them, I would not want this. They'll lose their carrier status and will be responsible for the content viewed

    --
    "Only one thing, is impossible for god: to find any sense in any copyright law on the planet." Mark Twain
  4. Re: Oh well.... by fonos · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Donâ(TM)t you remember Comcast throttling all upstream BitTorrent traffic and then lying about it to their customers when they got caught? That wasnâ(TM)t a problem?