On 9/19/2012 2:12 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 7:59 PM, Jonas Sicking <jo...@sicking.cc> wrote:
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 3:30 AM, Henri Sivonen <hsivo...@iki.fi> wrote:
FWIW, when preferential content access is tied to ISP instead of
hardware brand, Mozilla has gone as far as sending letters to D.C.
against such tying. (Yes, preferred access by HW vendor isn't the same
as by ISP, but I think it's in the ballpark or at least near the
ballpark as far as the Mission goes.)
Do you have links to this. That would be very helpful.
2009:
https://blog.mozilla.org/gen/2009/10/19/mozilla-signs-pro-net-neutrality-letter-to-fcc/
2010:
http://lockshot.wordpress.com/2010/10/20/net-neutrality-comments-to-the-fcc/
I don't believe these statements are relevant to the question.
Net neutrality is about ISPs blocking or throttling content. The danger
is that the ISP can close the internet and coerce website owners into
bad relationships. This is a threat to the internet as a whole. Mozilla
has and should continue to fight against this form of paywall internet.
Content access is about a server owner selling users content through an
ISP. The danger is that popular websites might have the power to coerce
ISPs into paying for popular content. This is a business problem, but
isn't really a threat to the internet in general and is not something
that I think Mozilla should take a stand on or try to prevent.
--BDS
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
