Amazon’s Paul Misener gets all reasonable in his comments on the FCC’s proposed net neutrality rules: With this win-win-win goal in mind, and consistent with the principle of maintaining an open Internet, Amazon respectfully suggests that the FCC’s proposed rules be extended to allow broadband Internet access service providers to favor some content so long [...]

Deborah Tate makes the argument that, “Consumers should be able to take control of their own consumption of broadband just as they have for other electronic commodities, and in some cases, they could reduce their monthly broadband service.” The argument is made that pay-for-use has been extremely successful in wireless communications and could be used in broadband access as well. In this respect a case is made for metered consumption models.

The market place for Internet server bandwidth is a competitive and open market, but the FCC’s proposed NPRM “Net Neutrality” rules threatens to eliminate many of the innovative connectivity services from the Internet. But it is crucial that we understand the full ramifications of outlawing existing and future connectivity models.

We are moving from an Ownership Society to an Access Society. I think that trend continues for awhile. In a digital economy, with an abundance of content, access may trump ownership.

A new paper from the Institute for Policy Integrity of the New York University School of Law claims that without Net Neutrality, ISPs can double charge and extort content providers. But their use of flawed models caused them to reverse the costs and reverse the conclusion.

A familiar line of argument is developing on the left. They suggest that “fill in the blank is the way it always was, so we’re really not suggesting anything new.” This is the argument they make about net neutrality, while completely ignoring that the largest provider of broadband – the cable industry – was never [...]

It would seem that I was way off mark when I said that Google’s Early Termination Fee (ETF) for the new Nexus One phone was effectively $350, it’s actually $550 which is more than the price of buying the unsubsidized full price of the phone!

One of the best parts of my job is I get to skim through countless blog posts about all sorts of telecom topics and see what people are thinking. But occasionally I stumble upon a post so truly hysterical that I smile for a week. This is one of those days.  Apparently, the Future of [...]

Collective vs. Creative: The Yin and Yang of Innovation Later this week the FCC will accept the first round of comments in its “Open Internet” rule making, commonly known as Net Neutrality. Never mind that the Internet is already open and it was never strictly neutral. Openness and neutrality are two appealing buzzwords that serve [...]

Phil Baker wrote an editorial in which he repeated the myth that opponents to Internet regulation are fighting for the ability of ISPs to block websites and operate discriminatory (in the bad sense) services. But Baker has it backwards because it is the new regulations that block free speech.