Begin forwarded message:
From: Gerry Faulhaber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: June 1, 2006 2:00:47 PM EDT
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [IP] Another Net Neutrality question...
[for IP, if you wish]
Good job spotting this trend, Hiawatha. We have seen the future and
it is private networks?
Remember that old maxim that the Internet sees censorship as a
network outage and routes around it? Well, how about a new maxim:
network operators will see legal constraints on the traditional
Internet as a flaw and they will build around it?
Let's call it the Othernet. And will somebody please tell me how we
got here?
Professor Gerald R. Faulhaber
Business and Public Policy Dept.
Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, PA 19104
Professor of Law
University of Pennsylvania Law School
----- Original Message ----- From: "David Farber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 11:38 AM
Subject: [IP] Another Net Neutrality question...
Begin forwarded message:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: June 1, 2006 11:15:37 AM EDT
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Another Net Neutrality question...
...this one asked in my role as tech reporter. I'm doing a story
on the
matter. It'll be straight down the middle, no sides taken. But
there's an
aspecr of this issue that I haven't seen addressed, and I'm hoping the
hypersmart people on the list can tidy it up for me.
We keep talking about a two-tiered Internet. I may have helped
establish
that meme with a story I did on this issue a couple months ago.
But is
that really what's happening? Can't one just as easily argue that the
"premium" broadband tier isn't really the Internet at all?
Imagine that Verizon, without using the "I" word, had decided to
build a
new high-speed private data network to millions of homes. They'd
use this
network to carry TV signals, as well as a variety of computer data
services. The network would use TCP/IP technology, but would run
entirely
over Verizon's prvately owned hardware.
If Verizon had done such a thing, would anyone argue that the
company was
obligated to share this network with others, without charging them
usage
fees? Wouldn't we shrug and say that since Verizon spent the billions
needed to build the network, they could do with it as they pleased?
But this is pretty much what's happening now, isn't it? This
second tier
of Internet service is really more like a private network. It's
not so
much a bifurcation of the Internet, but a complete departure from it.
Looked at that way, why shouldn't the broadband providers charge
use fees
to other data services?
Hiawatha Bray
Technology Reporter
Boston Globe
135 Morrissey Blvd.
P.O. Box 55819
Boston, MA 02205-5819 USA
617-929-3119 voice
617-929-3183 fax
617-233-9419 cell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Recent writings: www.boston.com/business/technology/bray
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-
people/
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as [email protected]
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
