------------------------------ From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> Subject: [opendtv] Re: F.C.C. Is Deluged With Comments on Net Neutrality Rules Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 01:53:03 +0000 Craig Birkmaier posted: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/16/technology/a-deluge-of-comment-on-net-rules.html?ref=technology&_r=0 ------------ . . . "In no other area of the economy does the government ban voluntary market transactions (here, for example, quality-of-service enhancements) specifically in order to prevent those with superior resources from offering better services to their own customers." - AT&T . . . ------------ Kind-a disingenuous, wouldn't you say? No one is saying that customers can't buy faster or better Internet service, or even access to private sites. What people are screaming at the FCC about is that the middlemen, the broadband providers, are doing this behind the backs of their customers. "Voluntary market transactions" are supposed to be available to CUSTOMERS. Instead, they are being denied to customers, when content owners and locally monopolistic service providers are in cahoots. Gimme a break. Bert ------------------------------ Hi Bert (et al.): I agree with your last sentiments, but I'm a little confused on where you stand. But maybe I don't have the full understanding. Not quite 4 years ago, Netflix had to pay Comcast a bunch of money to get Netflix stream flowing into Comcast at normal speed. Otherwise, Comcast was going to reduce the bit rates for all traffic originating from the service provider (Level 3) that Netflix uses. I believe Comcast's position was that Netflix took up too much bandwidth and needed the money to expand their infrastructure to support the traffic. (Example of event in news: http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/web/11/30/netflix.comcast/) Personally, I thought that this was Comcast's way of choking Netflix, which, at the time, was competition. But that was my own opinion and I equated it to blackmail. I thought this was very counter to 'net neutrality' and I clearly stated I would drop my ISP if they did this to my traffic. If I remember right, at the time, you countered my argument and said you had no problem with an ISP negotiating different rates for the higher bandwidth requirements. But perhaps I misunderstood your argument. I also think that the stance Wheeler has taken and proposed FCC regulations supports Comcast's tactic, that they can adjust speed for different traffic from where they originate from and negotiate payments for higher speeds. Perhaps I do not understand the intricacies of FCC's possible regulation. But at present, it sounds to me like you are against the possible FCC regs and these deals the ISPs are making in the middle. I'm not trying to badger; I'm just curious if you changed your mind: are you opposed to or support the Net Neutrality bandwagon; or did I misunderstand your earlier arguments with the Netflix-Comcast deal; or do I have things all mixed up? Dan