nanog mailing list archives
Charging content providers less?
From: Bradley Dunn <bradley () dunn org>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 22:48:39 -0400 ()
On Fri, 25 Oct 1996, Jim Dixon wrote:
I am saying that * we (a backbone ISP) * charge customer ISPs whose primary business is dialup * (net consumers of benefit) * more than those whose business is selling Web space or who operate a Web server * (net producers of benefit)
That is an interesting justification for additional "reseller" charges. I am not convinced it is valid, though. Most of the sites that provide half way decent content these days either charge directly for it, or charge indirectly by making you wade through advertisements. In this manner the sites are being compensated in a much more efficient manner, determined by the market. Do you really think it is our job as network providers to decide who is a net consumer and who is a net producer? I think not, I think it is our job to deliver bits. Let the net consumers and the net producers themselves negotiate the terms of their transaction. Should a bookstore have to pay less in taxes because it provides a service people want? No, the bookstore should incorporate the taxes into its prices, just as a web site should incorporate the costs of connectivity into its prices. -BD - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations, (continued)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Jim Dixon (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Jeremy Porter (Oct 26)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations alex (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Jakob Faarvang (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Michael Dillon (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations bmanning (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Matt Ranney (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Jim Dixon (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Robert E. Seastrom (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Jim Dixon (Oct 25)
- Charging content providers less? Bradley Dunn (Oct 25)
- Re: Charging content providers less? Jim Dixon (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Michael Dillon (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Jim Dixon (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Alex.Bligh (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Robert E. Seastrom (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Michael Dillon (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations alex (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Jim Dixon (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations alex (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Larry J. Plato (Oct 25)