nanog mailing list archives
Equal access to content
From: Sean Donelan <sean () donelan com>
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 08:54:35 -0500 (EST)
On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, Randy Bush wrote:
the two year window is far too low given the sbc ceo's recent public statements on the use of his wires by google and the like.
Should content suppliers be required to provide equal access to all networks? Or can content suppliers enter into exclusive contracts? If Google sets up a WiFi network in San Francisco or buys AOL with Comcast, can Google create a custom content for users on its networks? Or must Google offer the same cotent on the same terms and conditions to everyone? Should AOL be able to offer selected content to only its customers, such as music downloads? Or must AOL supply that content to everyone equally? Comcast offers its users access to the Disney Connection web site, should Disney be required to offer it to all Internet users equally? The NFL offers its Sunday Ticket exclusively through DirecTV? Or must the NFL offer the same content to every network? What rules should exist on how Google operates? Or is it just traditionally lobbying? Google says regulate the other guy, but not itself. The other guys say regulate Google, but not them.
Current thread:
- SBC/AT&T + Verizon/MCI Peering Restrictions Daniel Golding (Nov 02)
- Re: SBC/AT&T + Verizon/MCI Peering Restrictions Randy Bush (Nov 02)
- Equal access to content Sean Donelan (Nov 02)
- Re: Equal access to content Randy Bush (Nov 02)
- Re: Equal access to content Christopher L. Morrow (Nov 02)
- Re: Equal access to content Blaine Christian (Nov 02)
- Re: Equal access to content Doug Barton (Nov 02)
- Re: Equal access to content Andy Davidson (Nov 03)
- Re: Equal access to content Christian Kuhtz (Nov 03)
- Equal access to content Sean Donelan (Nov 02)
- Re: Equal access to content Mike Leber (Nov 03)
- Re: Equal access to content Mike Leber (Nov 03)
- Re: Equal access to content Randy Bush (Nov 03)
- Re: SBC/AT&T + Verizon/MCI Peering Restrictions Randy Bush (Nov 02)