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: Major UK ISPs challenge Digital Economy Act

I noticed the number, **400m as the cost of infringement. 

I argue that the costs of locking down the infrastructure to protect that
revenue stream is far higher. And what proof is there that this kind of
lockdown will actually bring in this revenue? Is such a draconian limit on
what is, in effect, free speech an appropriate response to leakage of

What is the corresponding number for the cost of locking down the
infrastructure so that we have to pay for billable events for using the
existing physical copper, wire and radios?  It's like charging per-step for
using the sidewalk.

A simple example -- what if we made a portion of the existing "broadband"
available for cellular calls rather than requiring we go through towers. I'm
not saying that existing protocols would do this but the physical capacity
is there and is held off the market by policy. DE assures that people can't
even contribute capacity for public use.

How different is this from laws banning walking without a license in case
you may be singing Happy Birthday without authorization. (For those who
don't know Happy Birthday is under copyright and there are lawyers making
their livelihood tracking down offenders).

More on telecom costs http://rmf.vc/?n=IPTelecomCosts

** -- supposed to be a British Pound sign, AKA, 0xA3.

-----Original Message-----
From: nnsquad-bounces+nnsquad=bobf.frankston.com@nnsquad.org
[mailto:nnsquad-bounces+nnsquad=bobf.frankston.com@nnsquad.org] On Behalf Of
Lauren Weinstein
Sent: Friday, July 09, 2010 11:35
To: nnsquad@nnsquad.org
Subject: [ NNSquad ] Major UK ISPs challenge Digital Economy Act

Major UK ISPs challenge Digital Economy Act

http://bit.ly/9xxoKe  (BBC)

NNSquad Moderator