The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post

Thu Apr 24 21:42:42 UTC 2014

On 4/24/2014 9:59 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
> I think you and I disagree on the definition of "anti-competitive".
>
> But that's fine. There is more than one problem to solve. I just figured the FCC thing was timely and operational.
>
I agree with you, Patrick. Double digit/meg pricing needs to die.

I'm not sure that the change really alters backbone policy, but it would 
definitely open the doors for bad things in the access networks. That 
being said, only the largest networks could put enough pressure to 
benefit from it, and some do that currently. I also don't see this as 
any different than the business model some streaming sites enforce where 
the ISP must pay for stream access based on their subscribers instead of 
interested subscribers just paying for an individual account. Fair is 
fair, and some of the streamers have been hitting ISPs longer. Once 
again, only the largest streamers can hope to get away with it, and only 
the largest ISPs can get the low priced deals. In both cases, it's the 
small ISPs and small content providers that suffer.

I don't see the FCC stopping megacorp bullying anytime in the near future.

Jack