Internet Infrastructure Companies Oppose Net Neutrality

[Pinnacle]

Thirty-four of the most well known names in network hardware make their stance known


http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=2416

[Absolute_0]

lol, Cisco is the most outspoken critic and they're defending their potential money making technology.

If i read the article correct, they want to let ISPs filter the viewable webpages to "alleviate stress on the network." But i don't trust big corporations enough to give them that power.

[Stuperman]

This is kinds like privatizing roads or Power lines, are they a public resource, well, traditionally, but if these companies paid for them I can understand thier position. I don't agree with it, and I think it will change the internet for the worse, but I'm not sure there is any stopping it.

[nn_step]

I am not liking that much..

[Cobalt]

Imagine if ISPs started restricting access to competitors websites. I can definatly see this taking on an anti-competitive slant if these businesses get their way. Then again "unrestricted access" could become a sales pitch for some of them but then there'd be a rise in prices for no good reason.

[VulgarHandle]

Imagine if ISPs started restricting access to competitors websites. I can definatly see this taking on an anti-competitive slant if these businesses get their way. Then again "unrestricted access" could become a sales pitch for some of them but then there'd be a rise in prices for no good reason.

competition is competition, if some allows unrestricted access for one price, another will do the same for cheaper, and so on and so on, why is this so hard to understand....

[Cobalt]

I take that as rather insulting frankly. Of course I understand that but it will take time to happen. At first we will see restricted access and it will be a long time before someone decides to take the plunge and offer unrestricted. Then the whole thing sets off and prices go down etc. What you don't seem to understand is that the companies would not be asking for this if they were not going to employ it.

[VulgarHandle]

of course they will implement it, they thing is started by the cobe act, which will open the market, that will make for more isp's, and if they're gonna compete, they're gonna have to make it faster for their consumers, if this means cutting out typically "useless" sites as well as competitors sites, so be it, them restricting will be cause for charging less as well.... i'm ok with it, i consider myself to be well-informed, too bad if iggy's won't know what's best for them, that's the way it is now, isn't it?

[Cobalt]

No it isn't the way it is, thats the whole point. At the moment the net is neutral so we have free access. This is being proposed but hasn't passed yet so there should be efforts made to stop it in order to maintain consumer freedom. People often say that consumer freedom is a naieve point of view which doesn't exist but that deosn't mean it isn't worth pursuing.

[Stuperman]

How am I suposed to cross shop competing ISP's if all thier websites are blocked? I see this more as a censorship issue than a consumer freedom issue, this is the first step down a slipperly slope.

[nn_step]

How am I suposed to cross shop competing ISP's if all thier websites are blocked? I see this more as a censorship issue than a consumer freedom issue, this is the first step down a slipperly slope.
Agreed, these laws will make our tasks much more difficult

[VulgarHandle]

here's the bill, give it a look through, and tell me if you still oppose it
http://www.baller.com/pdfs/COPE.pdf