Net Neutrality means an ISP cannot favor one service over another. It does not mean the ISP has to ensure enough bandwidth to access every service available. If Hughes is forced to launch more satellites, then we might have a problem.
Make your TOS explicit without naming any specific type of service. “Residential service provides burst speeds up to 50Mbps depending on location and hardware. During periods of heavy download activity, the speed will automatically regulate to 2.5Mbps x 1Mbps until the download is complete. Examples of heavy download activity include computer software upgrades, books, music, and video.” Customer agrees to the TOS or finds another service. Problem solved. Jerry From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 9:22 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] "Net neutrality" That's what got us into the mess we're now in. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com _____ From: "Brett A Mansfield" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 11:20:07 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] "Net neutrality" It may be legal, but why should I be required to provide someone access to a paid service without getting anything from it? It’s like telling a retailer that they can sell their product in the mall without having to pay any rent. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield Silver Lake Internet > On Feb 11, 2015, at 10:16 AM, Ken Hohhof <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: > > Block legal content? No. > > > -----Original Message----- From: Brett A Mansfield > Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 10:52 AM > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] "Net neutrality" > > I was kind of wondering another thing about this proposal. I know it will > make it so we cannot have "fast and slow lanes", but can we block a service > completely? For example, the new sling TV? > > Thank you, > Brett A Mansfield > >> On Feb 11, 2015, at 9:46 AM, GW List <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> I've sent letters to my senator and representative. >> >> We'll see. >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- From: Brett A Mansfield >> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2015 12:28 PM >> To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> Subject: [AFMUG] "Net neutrality" >> >> >> I just ready yet another article on the so called "net neutrality" the FCC >> will be voting on Feb 26th. This government overreach is going to force me >> to have to register to collect taxes on all of my customers, which I'll need >> to pay someone to do for me to make sure I stay in compliance, which will >> require that I raise prices to cover my increased costs. >> >> It will also prevent me from being able to run any kind of QoS on my >> network, so goodbye to any decent VoIP calls. >> >> I for one would like to keep the government out of my business beyond what >> they already are. The article I read stated that it will likely pass. If it >> does, I think something very "extreme" may need to be done. If in protest >> every ISP in the USA shut down their networks either until the law was >> repealed or for just a day or two strike I think the government would get >> the picture, and if they didn't then the millions of people complaining to >> them about it would certainly help. >> >> I know that is very extreme, but just a thought. Anyone else have any ideas? >> Perhaps if we just threaten to do so may help? I'm just spitballing here, >> so please don't think I'm being to crazy. I just want the discussion to >> begin of what we could really do to stop this. >> >> Thank you, >> Brett A Mansfield > >
