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

Fri Apr 25 14:13:28 UTC 2014

On 04/25/2014 08:23 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
> On Apr 25, 2014, at 00:57 , Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon at cox.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> In a private message I asked if he could name a single monopoly that existed without regulation to protect its monopoly power.
> I answered in a private message: Microsoft.
>
> Kinda obvious if you think about it for, oh, say, 12 microseconds.
>
>
>
DeBeers Diamond cartel, which operated internationally and held an 
effective monopoly on the diamond market for *decades* was apparently 
beyond the reach of regulation to either assist or hinder them, and has 
only recently faded somewhat in the face of competition that they can't 
reach with their traditional protective tactics.

The Standard Oil monopoly was obtained without the special assistance of 
government as well, though they were broken up by the government. The 
methods they used should be mandatory study for everyone.

The AT&T monopoly position *was* granted (and later revoked) by the 
government.

Net neutrality is an intervention of the government to prevent monopoly 
forming tactics on the part of major players, so I think it is something 
worth having. It is not (unfortunately) something that is a natural 
state for the Internet.

-- 
Daniel Taylor          VP Operations            Vocal Laboratories, Inc.
dtaylor at vocalabs.com   http://www.vocalabs.com/            (612)235-5711