NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad
[ NNSquad ] Re: "Regulating" the Internet -- and Distinctions
What has to happen is very clear: "telecommunications services" must be defined as "physical transmission facilities" and "information services" as the applications of those facilities. The former must be carefully regulated wherever a market failure has created a destructive monopoly. The latter should be left completely alone because it's vibrant and diverse, and there's really nothing wrong with it.
Under no circumstances must the telecommunications service providers be allowed to grab further control over the information services that use them. We can count on them to try.
I think you have found the exact crucial distinction.
Much as I hate the idea of telling the people who built out the physical lines (cables, fiber) that "we are taking control of your stuff for our benefit", it worked out not-too-badly in the telco "breakup". So maybe an equivalent thing here: a requirement that the cablecos rent the use of their lines to other providers at a price determined to be "fair" by the government.
That would allow almost anybody to get into the ISP business for the cost of a couple of servers and a few routers, just as you could become a "telephone company" for a few $1000 in the 1980s & 1990s. Of course, you won't last long unless you can sell your service for more than the cost of renting (your share of) the cables plus your own operating costs...
Another open question: how robust is ATM? If we allow random people to declare themselves ISPs and connect directly into the ATM "backbone", will that create the same sort of security holes (at a much deeper level) that we currently see on the Internet, with DNS Spoofing and fake routing tables?