Comments on: Neutralizing Net Neutrality

By: “Filmmaker” magazine

“Filmmaker” magazine — Sat, 30 Mar 2013 13:53:30 +0000

[...] February 2013: Neutralizing Net Neutrality [...]

By: February 2013: Neutralizing Net Neutrality

February 2013: Neutralizing Net Neutrality — Wed, 27 Mar 2013 21:42:34 +0000

[...] http://filmmakermagazine.com/64583-neutralizing-net-neutrality/ [...]

By: Eyeswideopen

Eyeswideopen — Thu, 07 Feb 2013 21:42:00 +0000

An opportunity for what competitor? You make it sound like anyone could start a telcom and jump in. Whatever competition comes from other players who have similar agendas. Someone new will not be able to compete in the same scale.

Your ignorance of the practicalities, is blinded by your ideals of capitalism

By: 2011-2013 Writings - David Rosen Writes

2011-2013 Writings - David Rosen Writes — Thu, 07 Feb 2013 16:48:00 +0000

[...] February 2013: Neutralizing Net Neutrality [...]

By: Media Current - David Rosen Writes

Media Current - David Rosen Writes — Thu, 07 Feb 2013 16:41:19 +0000

[...] February 2013: Neutralizing Net Neutrality [...]

By: Video Streaming & Indies - David Rosen Writes

Video Streaming & Indies - David Rosen Writes — Thu, 07 Feb 2013 14:46:56 +0000

[...] Net neutrality may end this year. Verizon, AT&T and the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) are spearheading a three-pronged attack against the open Internet and other open forms of digital communications. Read more … [...]

By: alwaysthink

alwaysthink — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 17:59:00 +0000

You should learn a little history of telecomm in the USA and the rest of the world. For decades now, thanks to the deregulation of ATT in the 1980′ies the USA has fallen further and further behind in comm technology compared to other Industrialize nations that have telecomm run by their PTT authorities.

The Reagan “free market” philosophy is a huge failure in advancing cutting edge communications tech to all Americans. All it has achieved is to give up American dominance in core comm tech to the Chinese who now make most of the core equipment for the world networks at Huawai.

By: theunholycow

theunholycow — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 16:33:00 +0000

That is never what happens. If AT&T doesn’t provide a service, or sets a price too high or similar. What happens is that the few other telecoms who provide a similar service will price or behave similarly so that they can maximize profit and maintain oligopoly.

Your response is twaddle, the idea that pure capitalism reflects on human circumstance by it’s nature is half-witted.

By: Drew

Drew — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 03:49:00 +0000

Pure nonsense. This is nothing like “SOPA-PIPA” — it’s the opposite.

Essentially, your assertion in this article is that the only way to promote freedom and innovation is to have the government regulate it. This means you truly don’t understand how opportunities drive both development and innovation, nor how competition lowers prices for consumers.

In simple terms — if services aren’t being provided, someone steps in to provide them — and — if AT&T charges too much for whatever or blocks a service demanded by consumers — an opportunity is created for a competitor to offer something better.

In other words — the conclusion of a vast and thoughtful essay to your article is — pure nonsense.