Net neutrality numbers don't add up

A new study suggests regulating the Net will cost millions of jobs. A closer look reveals the study's main ingredient is manure, Cringely concludes

Page 3 of 3

Glass has published his own set of Net principles [PDF] -- which to my mind aren't that much different than the FCC's. They include the notions that freedom of speech should be guaranteed and anti-competitive behavior by network providers prohibited, but ISPs should be free to manage traffic as they see fit, including banning bandwidth-hogging P2P networks. He writes:

In any event, the key point to make about "network neutrality" is that it's really a battle of the titans: Google against all ISPs. And the stakes are huge: small, competitive ISPs such as the one that I am now operating wouldn't be able to survive under those regulations. I'd have to sell (if I could) or fold. And my customers would be very disappointed if I did either.

There's lots more to say on this topic, but I've exhausted this space for now. Several Cringesters wrote me detailed, highly cogent emails on this subject, which I'll get to in a future post.

Bottom line: If we could trust network providers to self-regulate and play by rules we can all agree upon, that would be a better way to go than government regulation. But history tells us we cannot.

Got another point of view on Net neutrality? Lay it on me below or shoot me an email:

This story, "Net neutrality numbers don't add up," was originally published at Read more of Robert X. Cringely's Notes from the Field blog.

| 1 2 3 Page 3