NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad

NNSquad Home Page

NNSquad Mailing List Information


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[ NNSquad ] Re: More on Verizon's rejection of AT&T's attitude toward filtering

Yes, but doesn't a *publisher* charge on a fraction of **profits** (or revenues, depends on the contract), after taking out costs of printing? But there are other costs, such as marketing, advance royalty, etc. I'm not claiming it's a fair, competitive, or an ideal situation (and it really fails when we consider Old Media companies), but it's what we find acceptable and the norm.

But ISPs are NOT publishers, so I am not sure the nuance of Vint's quote is even appropriate (costs-plus vs. up-front profit sharing).

ISPs are delivery people. Sure, UPS, USPS, etc. have overnight vs. regular. But the end-users make that decision based on what they want or need. The carrier doesn't make that decision after inspecting the payload. Sure, they can air-ship my candy instead of ground trucking it if they have empty space on the plane going out. But that rarely happens in a well-optimized system.

Taking this argument to the extreme, let's say regular mail was slow (Mother's day coming up?), and my expensive candy would melt/spoil. The carrier might contact me and offer to get it to me in time by my paying an extra fee. How would I feel? Other than my concerns of how they found out (maybe the box has to say perishable, food item), at the margin it would be worth it. But some part of me would wonder did they purposely slow down that piece? Or, allowed "regular" service to degrade so much that everyone will pay for premium? Is Venti the new small?

In a free market, companies should be allowed to do that. But we don't have a competitive market. I find recent data interesting that despite the consistent discount offered by Telcos over cable, they have not pressured cablecos to lower prices. Instead, they are themselves raising prices, either of direct services or affiliated products (value-added services).


Lauren Weinstein wrote:
this is like the printer who claims that he should get a share of the revenues from the book he printed as opposed to profit based on the cost of printing.

Indeed, and this is made worse by the fact that anticompetitive
factors can creep in through a variety of vectors.

The bandwidth caps, tiers, and surcharges now being contemplated by
various ISPs become especially problematic when viewed in terms of
ISPs' own provision of data intensive content (e.g. video and movie
services) that would *not* be subject to the ISP-dictated bandwidth
constraints placed on external Internet traffic and similar external

The potentially anticompetitive aspects of this situation are obvious and dramatic.

NNSquad Moderator