nanog mailing list archives
Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010
From: Barry Shein <bzs () world std com>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 16:50:18 -0400
On April 21, 2008 at 09:44 drc () virtualized org (David Conrad) wrote:
I suspect this was referencing the difference between "public" as in governmentally owned/operated (e.g., most of the highway system in the US) vs. "private" that is non-governmentally owned/operated. The Internet of today does indeed exist because of private efforts.
But several of the major players in the net neutrality issue are beneficiaries of legal monopolies (e.g., just try to go into the landline voice business in Verizon's territory) and thus regulated for good reason. I think once a company accepts a legally enforced monopoly, sometimes with 100M or more customers, they're not really a private company. If they want the freedoms of a purely private company then they should renounce their monopolies. I wouldn't hold my breath. I realize others involved on the same side are not legal monopolies, though even cable TV companies have legally enforced monopolies or near monopolies on the catv wire plants in many of their customer regions. Remove the companies with the legal monopolies from the net neutrality issue (i.e., demand net neutrality only from the monopoly beneficiaries) and would this be much of an issue? Not really. That's because what you'd be left with is *competition*. But how can anyone seriously compete with companies who can cross-subsidize from legally enforced monopolies of 100M customers, including every single business in their region which is often delineated in chunks like "all of the northeastern united states" or thereabouts? Fair is fair: They shouldn't be able to have it both ways and be able to cry "legal monopoly!" when someone tries to compete with them and "private company!" when the monopoly grantors try to reasonably regulate that monopoly-derived power. It's an awesome market power they have been granted. We shouldn't let them use it to control other markets. -- -Barry Shein The World | bzs () TheWorld com | http://www.TheWorld.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD | Login: Nationwide Software Tool & Die | Public Access Internet | SINCE 1989 *oo* _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list NANOG () nanog org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
Current thread:
- Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010, (continued)
- Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010 Marshall Eubanks (Apr 18)
- Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010 Patrick W. Gilmore (Apr 18)
- Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010 Williams, Marc (Apr 18)
- Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010 Marc Manthey (Apr 18)
- Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010 Mike Lieman (Apr 18)
- Message not available
- Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010 Mike Lieman (Apr 18)
- Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010 Jeff Shultz (Apr 18)
- [Nanog] [admin] Re: ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010 Alex Pilosov (Apr 18)
- Message not available
- Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010 David Conrad (Apr 20)
- Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010 Barry Shein (Apr 22)
- Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010 Sean Donelan (Apr 19)
- Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010 Tomas L. Byrnes (Apr 19)
- Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010 Paul Wall (Apr 20)
- Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010 Randy Bush (Apr 20)
- Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010 Sean Donelan (Apr 21)