« 8 down; 42 to go | Main | Profits Behind Hoarding Video Pie? »

October 19, 2006

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834559fa769e200d834f6a27669e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference C4CC's Position on Net Neutrality:

Comments

William Walsh

Your position on Net Neutrality is a direct reflection of the interests of your corporate sponsors, and has nothing to do with what is in the best interests of consumers.

This is a sham, and a deception. If you truly cared about the CONSUMER experience, as you claim, your position on Net Neutrality would be firm and direct.

But then you would lose that money from AT&T et al, because they know they do not truly want consumer friendly laws, they want laws to go after cable companies so that they can get an advantage through regulation that they can't get through their own technological innovation.

As long as you fail to FULLY stand by your stated mission of consumer friendly advocation, you are a sham, and a HARM to that goal you claim to be trying to achieve.

Bob Johnson

I appreciate your opinon, William, but fear you have mistated our position. There must be clear rules policing the Internet to keep it free from discrimination.

We believe the Senate bill does exactly that by empowering the FCC to hear and resolve any allegations of unjust behavior. That provision has been largely ignored by those seeking a more bureacratic approach.

Unfortunately, the benefits of national cable competition have been held up by those who want to federalize and regulate the internet in an unprecedented

manner under the guise of net neutrality. Their proposals are misguided and will keep the internet from fully realizing its potential.

Not a Republocrat

In your statement about Net Neutrality, you said:

"Most American cable customers who are unhappy now with their cable providers can't switch -- unless its to switch their cable off altogether. They can, however, find another provider for every other communication service."

Not true. Where I live (Middleton, WI), there is only one option for high-speed Internet access - cable Internet through Charter Communications, which incidentally is also the sole cable TV provider for the area.

Inaccuracies notwithstanding, I fail to understand your reluctance to address this issue. The Internet is just as valid a means of communicating via video as television is - if that's truly what you're concerned about - and will end up in the same situation that cable tv appears to be in now if the communications behemoths get their way and net neutrality is abolished. Juxtapose both situations and they seem to be rather similar.

So, explain to me why you fail to address this issue - without the smoke and mirrors this time, please.

anyone

I have one high speed provider and they throttle traffic. They are my only choice for cable tv as well. I actually feel lucky to even have that since a couple of years ago, there were none in this area.

Oh and fyi - I live in the 5th largest city in the U.S.

Clearly the statements provided by cable and telco companies are false and misleading.

Just as your spin is. No one is fooled.

The comments to this entry are closed.