Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamplighter
So is there a "law" now that requires net-neutrality, or is it just common practice now among the ISP's ?
|
Step back and view a larger picture. Some industries (autos, finance) need heavy regulation because of their 'we want profits at the expense of the customer' attitude. Therefore even every piece of glass in a car conforms to extensive laws and regulations.
The computer industry historically has always been about the product. Serve the customer. Make better products. Don't worry about profits. Then massive profits will exist. Historically, computer companies that tried to maximize profits / ignore the product quickly had no profits.
Net neutrality has been mostly about that attitude. However where some companies attempted to subvert that (ie the telecoms, AT&T, cable companies, etc), then the 1996 Federal Communication Act said free market forces can provide what those companies would not. An example of where law promoted more net neutrality. It should be obvious to every layman what the 1996 Federal Communication Act did.
The question is whether we need a new business model. It is not entirely clear what this Verizon Google deal involves. Cell phone companies can routinely increase bandwidth with little restriction. Simply make cells smaller. Simply sell larger bandwidth to customers who would pay for that larger bandwidth. After all, that is always how a neutral net worked. (A concept that literally put fear in 'we fear to innovate' companies such as AT&T).
Companies simply move data without knowledge (or should care) of what that data is. The relationship of data transporters and information providers automatically made net neutrally not just necessary, but preferred. For some reason, this business model is being questioned.
Well, it is companies such as Comcast that all but wanted government regulation put onto the computer industry. Comcast wanted to maximize profits with money games rather than innovation. Comcast want to use their data transporter position to manipulate and dominate the information provider industry – which is why Comcast bought NBC, subverted Skype packets, etc. If too many companies do this - what is a normal attitude in the finance industry - then net neutrality may have to be legislated.
Details of the Verizon Google negotiations are not limited to mobile phones. They are only discussing mobile phones. But it threatens to be imposed everywhere in the internet. And that may (we can fear) result in massive (and necessary) government regulations.
One of the first laws that made net neutrality possible was the CarterPhone decision - about mobile phones. That meant you no longer paid $400 a month for a digital data line and $hundreds a month to rent their modem. Yes, AT&T was that anti-innovative. Opening the network to free market innovation was probably the first step to what we now called net neutrality. Followed by the 1984 breakup of AT&T.
Is net neutrality created by laws. Yes. And not directly. Every example in this thread are the simple things that any consumer should know. Would know, but had not yet connected the dot to see the bigger picture.