‘Net Neutrality’ v. Telecommunication Companies Rate Increases and Selective Internet Access.

Despite a growing chorus arguing
against allowing giant telecommunications companies from creating tiered
pricing services, a Republican defeat of a Democratic amendment in the
House of Representatives made a “net neutrality” law less likely. Legislation
for “net neutrality” is still in the wind over at the Senate via Maine’s
Republican Senator Olympia Snowe and North Dakota’s Democratic Senator
Byron Dorgan [Google].

(If I understand correctly) “Net neutrality” [Google–News]
means that LISNews.com ideally gets the same quality of service over the
internet from the telecoms as Microsoft.com. But the telecommunication
companies would like to be able to charge more if website operators want
better service. The tradeoff is that while Microsoft could afford it, LISNews and other small websites probably wouldn’t be able to. The concern is that while big media players
would get the fast lane, the telecom’s would stick LISNews in the slow
lane (or bumped off the information highway altogether).

For consumers, this could mean the telecommunications companies could
arbitrarily limit the speed with which different websites are accessed,
or possibly even deny access to legal sites. While telecoms have protested
they wouldn’t do that, there isn’t any law saying they can’t and the giant
telecoms AT&T, Verizon, and Comcast have apparently been lobbying hard
against such a “net neutrality” law (which suggests that small websites
_may legally_ end up in a slow lane, or bumped, unless they pay more).

Microsoft, however, has lobbied _for_ “net neutrality”. They aren’t
alone, supporters for “net neutrality” include the ALA,
eBay, Yahoo, and from InformationWeek:
the “AARP, Consumers Union, Consumer Federation of America, Free Press,
the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, MoveOn.org, Gun Owners of America,
MySpace.com and Vint Cerf” as well as “Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, Google
CEO Eric Schmidt, Intel President and CEO Paul Otellini and IAC/InternActiveCorp.
Chairman and CEO,” amongst
others. Read more at: SavetheInternet.com
/ F.A.Q. See also:
CNET,
FT.com,
LAtimes,
MSNBC.

Despite a growing chorus arguing
against allowing giant telecommunications companies from creating tiered
pricing services, a Republican defeat of a Democratic amendment in the
House of Representatives made a “net neutrality” law less likely. Legislation
for “net neutrality” is still in the wind over at the Senate via Maine’s
Republican Senator Olympia Snowe and North Dakota’s Democratic Senator
Byron Dorgan [Google].

(If I understand correctly) “Net neutrality” [Google–News]
means that LISNews.com ideally gets the same quality of service over the
internet from the telecoms as Microsoft.com. But the telecommunication
companies would like to be able to charge more if website operators want
better service. The tradeoff is that while Microsoft could afford it, LISNews and other small websites probably wouldn’t be able to. The concern is that while big media players
would get the fast lane, the telecom’s would stick LISNews in the slow
lane (or bumped off the information highway altogether).

For consumers, this could mean the telecommunications companies could
arbitrarily limit the speed with which different websites are accessed,
or possibly even deny access to legal sites. While telecoms have protested
they wouldn’t do that, there isn’t any law saying they can’t and the giant
telecoms AT&T, Verizon, and Comcast have apparently been lobbying hard
against such a “net neutrality” law (which suggests that small websites
_may legally_ end up in a slow lane, or bumped, unless they pay more).

Microsoft, however, has lobbied _for_ “net neutrality”. They aren’t
alone, supporters for “net neutrality” include the ALA,
eBay, Yahoo, and from InformationWeek:
the “AARP, Consumers Union, Consumer Federation of America, Free Press,
the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, MoveOn.org, Gun Owners of America,
MySpace.com and Vint Cerf” as well as “Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, Google
CEO Eric Schmidt, Intel President and CEO Paul Otellini and IAC/InternActiveCorp.
Chairman and CEO,” amongst
others. Read more at: SavetheInternet.com
/ F.A.Q. See also:
CNET,
FT.com,
LAtimes,
MSNBC.