net neutrality thoughts

[Craig White]

On Mon, 2006-12-18 at 15:46 -0700, eric© wrote:
> Just running things over in my head....I'm not pushing for or against
> it right now, just trying to better understand it.  
>  
> How is non-neutrality any different than the tiered system we have
> now?  The more money you pay, the faster UL/DL speeds you get.  Sounds
> the same to me as "the more money the business pays, the faster access
> they get".  Also sounds similar to "the more money you pay, the better
> location in the mall you get".  
>  
> Again, I'm not saying the corporations right, I'm not saying they're
> wrong.  Just trying to better understand things.  
----
There are many layers to the Internet and one of them is the pipe and
you do pay for access to the pipe and indeed, your fees tend to be
scaled towards the amount of pipe that you need.

The concept of net neutrality is not about how much you pay or amount of
pipe but rather what is permitted to flow on the pipe, and whose content
is prioritized and whose content is relegated to lower priority - sort
of a caste system based upon contents providers ability to generate
revenues (pay the toll so to speak) in order to achieve first class
delivery.

Imagine if you will, a startup company such as Google, incapable of
paying for first class distribution on a network that didn't provide net
neutrality...who would use a google if it was slow? How could start up
businesses ever get off the ground? The Internet offered a level playing
field so that new businesses could launch and develop clientele if they
scratched an itch and in a world that failed to ensure net neutrality,
if the cost of entry is too great, the effect would be chilling to
innovation.

I will repeat, the speech given by Lawrence Lessig as originally
proffered to the list by Alan and linked earlier in this thread
brilliantly breaks this all down into understandable terms.

Craig