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: Comcast's New "Two Strikes and You're Dead" Internet Usage Policy -- and More

>  Yeah, I guess "25 HD movies" (as your total usage for the month) wouldn't
> look so great, especially when Comcast's own on-demand/PPV movie offerings
> don't count against your Internet usage cap at all!  Well, so much for outside
> movie services providing HD.  "We don't need no stinkin' competition!" --
> right?

If you built out and owned infrastructure that had the capability of 
deliverying content with high-bandwidth requirements for little or no
extra cost, would it be wrong for you to take advantage of that 
infrastructure to provide such content for your customers?

If that infrastructure also connected to external resources through an
extra-cost portal whose cost was proportional to its usage would it be
wrong to not want to have to absorb high usage costs incurred by 
customers transferring high-bandwidth content through that portal?

This has very little to do with anti-competitive behavior. The problem is
companies like Amazon and Netflix implementing a flawed business plan
that leverages the fact that most Internet users pay a flat rate that
will not reflect the real cost of content delivery.

While it costs next to nothing (well, maintenance and other fixed costs
aside) for Comcast to deliver their own bits down their own network, it 
costs real money to move outside bits onto their network. By screaming
"anti-competitive!" you're saying that they either shouldn't be allowed
to provide something that might also be available at a higher cost from
an outside source, or that they should be forced to absorb the delivery 
cost for that outside content themselves.

The Internet is NOT an effective delivery mechanism for HD entertainment.

The original argument that started much of this was that the content
providers should pay extra to transit the local infrastructure. The
concern is valid, but the view is backwards. Amazon and Netflix are
merely "making available". The problem is that the consumer isn't
paying for the true cost of local delivery for what they're trying to 
retrieve. This would be apparent if Internet access was charged on a 
usage basis. But we all feel entitled to "unlimited" access.

Regardless, it's really not fair to make comparisons between internal
and external content delivery. They really aren't the same thing.