Net Neutrality: Telcos Want to Charge Web Sites for Web Speed, Access Preference

[mandy]

A senior telecommunications executive said yesterday that Internet service providers should be allowed to strike deals to give certain Web sites or services priority in reaching computer users, a controversial system that would significantly change how the Internet operates.

William L. Smith, chief technology officer for Atlanta-based BellSouth Corp., told reporters and analysts that an Internet service provider such as his firm should be able, for example, to charge Yahoo Inc. for the opportunity to have its search site load faster than that of Google Inc.

full article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...02109.html

EDITED to add related topic:
BellSouth, other telcos, consider move from flat fees to pay-as-you-go broadband http://community.tuliptools.com/index.ph...910.0.html

[jezebel]

Unfuckabelievable 

Gigi B. Sohn of Public Knowledge opposes allowing Internet providers to prioritize sites and content

I totally 100% fucking oppose it.  The Internet would  become a cultural wasteland like network television if these s got their greedy way.  :hoxmassnow9:

[accentnepal]

Fortunately access times are decreasing so rapidly that this likely will not work  -  this time.

Remember when somebody (AOL?) was going to insert links into other peoples' websites? A site would mention  widgets and they would link that word to a widget store, with out the site owner having any control of it. That idea seems to have gone away, but it is sure - they will try again.

[mandy]

Bell South and ATT have taken their proposal to Washington...

Telecoms want their products to travel on a faster Internet
Major site owners oppose 2-tier system

AT&T Inc. and BellSouth Corp. are lobbying Capitol Hill for the right to create a two-tiered Internet, where the telecom carriers' own Internet services would be transmitted faster and more efficiently than those of their competitors.

The proposal supported by AT&T and BellSouth would allow telecommunications carriers to offer their own advanced Internet video services to their customers, while rival firms' online video offerings would be transmitted at lower speed and with poorer image quality.

AT&T and other telecoms want to charge consumers a premium fee to connect to the higher-speed Internet. The companies could also charge websites a premium to offer their video to consumers on the higher-speed Internet...

full article: http://www.boston.com/business/technolog..._internet/

[amy]

Today video playback, tomorrow VoIP telephone service.

The telecom companies will use all means available to prevent newer VoIP services like Vonage, Skype,  from taking market share.

many small Internet start-ups would be unable to pay the fees, which could reduce consumer choice.

ATT (the merged SBC and ATT) and Bell South have over 100 years experience in reducing consumer choice.

[jezebel]

[quote author=amy link=topic=1523.msg6087#msg6087 date=1134602217]
Today video playback, tomorrow VoIP telephone service.

The telecom companies will use all means available to prevent newer VoIP services like Vonage, Skype,  from taking market share.

ATT (the merged SBC and ATT) and Bell South have over 100 years experience in reducing consumer choice.
[/quote]

I think they'll be the big players in VOIP.  One of them will buy Vonage.

[mandy]

A related commentary:

The Internet was the great noncommercial success story of our time. Commissioned by the government, built on open-source software, promulgated initially through research and academic facilities--the Internet was the crowning example of a public good, a resource without an owner, a self-regulating convocation of equals.

All that seems threatened now. This month, local phone companies revealed a far-reaching change to Internet access. These companies, who control the line into the Internet users' homes (usually through ADSL connections over traditional telephone wires) want to create varying levels of service for Internet content of their choice...

...we as citizens must demand our government to legislate and regulate for the common good, not just for the corporations that pay their bribes.

full article: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/8785

[rose]

The Internet was the great noncommercial success story of our time.

We should have flamed  a little harder back in '91 when NSF lifted the ban on commercial activity.  :twistedevil:

[jezebel]

we as citizens must demand our government to legislate and regulate for the common good, not just for the corporations that pay their bribes.

Fat chance they'll listen.

[Kristijntje]

Latest update.  The FCC spoke out against the telco's proposal at CES (the Consumer Electronics Show).

What you may not be familiar with is the FCC's intense fear that media companies or the telephone companies will wall off content and internet services from certain classes of customers. While not perfectly clear about the issue at hand, Martin seems to think the internet will be divided up and with different classes of content walled off from consumers.

Service providers should be free to charge different amounts for varying bandwidth, but they should not be allowed to cordon off content from consumers, Martin said.

"We need a watchful eye to ensure that network providers do not become internet gatekeepers, with the ability to dictate who can use the internet and for what purposes,"...

full article: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/07/ces_fcc_wsj/