Net Neutrality

google‑monopoly‑game.jpg

First I want to say that net neutrality regulations would keep the larger companies from creating a monopoly, something there are already existing laws for in other industries.  Remember antitrust laws and the Sherman Antitrust Act?  (http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-antitrust-laws.htm)  So why not enforce net neutrality?  Service providers should not be allowed to censor the information we seek over the internet.  Nor should they be able to speed up or slow down the speed of the internet.  I’m for freedom of internet usage.  Why should anyone be able to tell me what I can and cannot receive over the internet?  It’s appalling.

At the same time, I have to agree with Ed Whitacre in that internet providers such as Google shouldn’t be able to use telephone and cable lines for free.  Perhaps an agreement needs to be made between the internet companies and the phone and cable companies wherein the internet companies have to pay a fee to use these lines.  I know this is opening another can of worms, but it seems fair to me.  Telephone and cable companies are spending their money to install and maintain such lines and the internet companies should pay their fair share.  However, this is a completely separate issue.  Whitacre should not try to tie this into their desire to have control over the speed of the transfer of information from the internet nor should it give the ability to censor the information we receive.  We are, after all, the customer.  Remember customer service?  Don’t tick off the customer.  I can decide not to use AT&T, Verizon, or any other telecom company.  It’s my dime I’m spending, not theirs.

Guidelines would have to be developed and the consumer shouldn’t have to pay more since they are already paying, but the internet providers should realize their responsibility when it comes to using the lines and cables.  It could be as simple as Google footing for a portion of what it costs to install and maintain lines and cables already.  Sorry Google.

As to the idea that with no net neutrality regulation service providers will have more incentives to invest in networks and applications of the future, this seems absurd.  If net neutrality regulations were indeed realized, for service providers not to invest in networks and applications of the future would be the death of them.  Innovation and improvement is key to survival, so this just doesn’t make sense.

(http://www.smartcine.com/dr_seuss_horton_hears_a_who_review.html

)

Here’s a funny situation.  I live in Angola, NY.  I purchased a plan with AT&T for their 3G network and bought the wireless device that would get it to me.  I dished out $100 for it.  Subsequently, I found out that 3G wasn’t yet available in my area.  You think they would have told me that when I was expressing my interest?  No – they did not.  Guess who had to pay?  Me.  I got out of the plan, but had to pay extra to do so.  It was worth it because the speed was like that of dial-up, and not the DSL dial-up.  It was slow as heck.  So I bought Road Runner’s wireless service.  Watch out Time Werner if you try to censor my information.  I’ll be a customer of the past.  Some companies think they can do whatever they want.  So I say to AT&T, Verizon, Google, Yahoo, or any other telephone or cable company – watch it.  We are the customer.  Instead of thinking about the next way you can get more money, even if it involves screwing the customer, think about how you can satisfy the customer.  Don’t forget customer service.  We're here - we're here - we're here.

                                                                                      

(http://www.labnol.org/internet/interesting-facts-about-internet/9865/)