Is paranioa over “big Communications” or telco’s controlling the internet overdone?
Current consumers, both business and users pay for connectivity and services. Online service providers from Google to Rocketboom all pay their way. As for payment for premium service, such as faster delivery, well this has been the case for a long time with businesses being prepared to pay a premium for security and speed, whether through VPN’s or paying specialist online service providers.
Of course a two tier (or more) internet in the mass market where those who can pay get privileged treatment is fundamentally flawed. The arguments are well presented on Save the Internet. However this US and western centric view misses the global impact.
A far bigger issue is what impact will this have on less developed countries. Internet Cafes have sprung up all over Kabul in Afghanistan over the last 3 years what impact will a two, three or even four tier system have on Afghans access to the world outside? The World Bank estimates that around 10% of people in developing countries have access to the internet, one would suspect a large percentage of these to be on dial-up. In Kabul we had a expensive Wimax connection to our home, I hate to think how slow or unreliable the service would have been if other tiers of service had priority. Surely we would not want to condemn developing countries bottom rung in yet another tiered system of access to world markets?
One has to remember that AT&T, Verizon, Comcast to name just a few Telco’s in the US, like telco’s globally are struggling to find a replacement for loss of highly lucrative paying voice traffic to consumer friendly VOIP providers like Skype. In the US all telco’s are planning massive investments in convergent networks over which they can offer telephony, mobile, broadband and TV to the home. Interestingly in the UK which has a non-cable culture BT has taken a cheaper route. To replace the ‘lost’ telephony revenues, and cover the costs of the convergent networks, telco’s are scrabbling to increase revenues from broadband connectivity or internet services…
– – – but wait a minute! – – –
Haven’t they got it the wrong way around? Cable companies pay the content providers … so doesn’t it logically flow that all those innovative online providers should be paid by telco’s for providing the value-added products that drive demand for broadband that home owners do, after all, have to pay for?
Not only should the principal of net neutrality be upheld, US government and others should conciously not intervene with laws. The internet is genuinely changing the world with the access it provides to information, ideas and through sparking creativity, no ethnic group has an edge in “geekiness” lets keep it that way… maintain the net as a global platform for innovation!
Global Nomad101 