You think yr ISP sucks now, wait until they have to beg/payoff a bureaucrat every time they want to change how/when/why they do business.

The alternative is to allow my ISP to block something carried by their competitor or sponsored by the competition's sponsor?

what tiger yang said.

assuming it hasn't been done yet, congress would need to define the internet as a common carrier medium, just like telephone service is. i think with the widespread use of net-based multi-directional communication (e-mail in particular), the argument can clearly be made that ISPs should be regulated like phone providers rather than like unidirectional media like tv, radio, cable, etc. the difficulty comes with the convergence of uni- and multi-directional services, like your cable/internet/phone bundle.

the closest parallel comes with phone calls between networks. i don't remember the particulars (i'm a long way away from my telecommunications degree), but if network A can charge network B and network C different rates for connecting calls, then the argument for net neutrality suffers based on precedent. if regulation exists that says network A has to charge network B and network C the same amount, then net neutrality makes sense within that framework.

would Time Warner internet block or slow content from a website on a competing ISP? hard to tell. i'd imagine with enough instances of that, Time Warner customers would get pretty fed up and look for another ISP with better service for the content they want. at the risk of losing liberal points, do you think the market might figure this one out on its own?

also, who's to say that content providers won't simply band together and say "fuck you, we're not paying." will ISPs simply slow down *all* internet traffic to prove a point? i wouldn't want to be working in their customer service departments on the day they decide to do that...

awww. the fcc won't let me be!
[img]
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/showbiz/im ... 12390e.jpg[/img]