On Sep 17, 2010, at 9:23 09AM, Jack Bates wrote: > > Is it unfair that I pay streaming sites to get more/earlier video feeds over > the free users? I still have to deal with advertisements in some cases, which > generates the primary revenue for the streaming site. Why shouldn't a content > provider be able to pay for a higher class of service, so long as others are > equally allowed to pay for it?
No, it is definitely not, because *you* are the one paying for priority access for the content *you* feel is worth paying extra for faster access to. This is not the same thing as a content provider paying the carrier for priority access to your DSL line to the detriment of other sites you are interested it. How would you feel if you paid for priority access to hulu.com via this means, only to see your carrier de-prioritize that traffic because they're getting a check from Netflix? > Jack
