Netflix, Egypt, and the Case for Net Neutrality

[Joanne98]

In the wake of the FCC decision to approve a basic framework of net neutrality rules, the battle rages. While Internet providers like Verizon file preemptive challenges to regulations that haven't even taken effect yet, Netflix chimes in to defend net neutrality, and the political strife in Egypt provides a poignant illustration of how important it is for the Internet to be free and open.

Congress established the FCC in 1934 and designated it with the authority to regulate interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite and cable. Verizon--and subsequently MetroPCS--believes its wires, satellites, and cables are somehow exempt from government regulation, though, and has filed a legal challenge to the FCC's authority to implement a net neutrality framework.

Meanwhile, Netflix finds itself at the center of the net neutrality debate with its streaming video content drawing attention as the type of traffic that ISPs might like to throttle or discriminate against. In an open letter to shareholders, Netflix CEO Reed Hastings said, "Delivering Internet video in scale creates costs for both Netflix and for ISPs. We think the cost sharing between Internet video suppliers and ISPs should be that we have to haul the bits to the various regional front-doors that the ISPs operate, and that they then carry the bits the last mile to the consumer who has requested them, with each side paying its own costs," adding, "This open, regional, no-charges, interchange model is something for which we are advocating. Today, some ISPs charge us, or our CDN partners, to let in the bits their customers have requested from us, and we think this is inappropriate."

Hastings is referring to the ongoing battle between Level3 Communications and Comcast. Comcast has demanded that Level3 pay a surcharge for the privilege of having the Netflix streaming content delivered over its network. However, the Comcast customers are paying for a certain bandwidth of service, and Comcast should not involve itself in whether that bandwidth is used to send e-mails, shop Amazon, post Facebook status updates, or watch Netflix movies. The Comcast customer is already paying Comcast to deliver the content, so Comcast's additional surcharge amounts to double-dipping extortion.

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/218165/netflix_egypt_and_the_case_for_net_neutrality.html

[DCKit]

1. I'm already paying for that level of access.

I understand the good-faith effort of Netflix (because, really, it's only fair), but the ISPs want to be paid at both ends. If Netflix is willing to halve their costs, then the ISP should halve MY cost as well.

[Goblinmonger]

2. Comcast can go F themselves.

They have a history of blocking Google activities for god sakes. They clearly don't want open Internet for all. Netflix is fighting the fight of what media distribution will look like and Warner Brothers and other companies that make money off of physical DVDs are doing all they can to block those advancements and they will lose.

[snot]

3. K&R'd