[TriLUG] Net Neutrality under attack again

[David Burton]

For a taste of the other side of this issue, see, for example:
http://katysconservativecorner.com/how-internet-freedom-affects-you/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+katysconservativecorner%2Frss+%28Katy%27s+Conservative+Corner%29&utm_content=Gmail

Sample quote (from Representative Marsha Blackburn):  “this [proposed
net-neutrality legislation] is a hysterical reaction to a hypothetical
problem.”

I'm uncomforable with adding new layers of government regulation,
empowering boatloads of bureaucrats to tell ISPs how to run their
businesses, w/o clear demonstration of a real problem sufficiently
severe to justify it.  I recall that when Clear (nee ClearWire)
blocked other companies' VoIP, market pressures caused them to end
that policy.

In general, we have, IMO, too much gov't regulation over just about
everything, already.  Too often, regulations are short-sighted
(especially when they concern rapidly-changing technology), and/or
interest-group driven (think RIAA!), and/or invitations to graft.

Sample questions: if a company wanted to provide "family-friendly"
Internet, blocking porn sites, internet gambling, etc., would that
even be legal under the net-neutrailty proposals?  Or how about
taylored QoS, for better voice or gaming or
some-future-internet-application, would that even be legal under the
net-neutrality proposals?


-- 
“If anyone thinks the words ‘government’ and ‘efficiency’ belong in
the same sentence, we  have counseling available.”
- Sen. Paul Tsongas (D-MA)