{"id":1027,"date":"2010-06-22T12:53:41","date_gmt":"2010-06-22T10:53:41","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.ofcourseimright.com\/?p=1027"},"modified":"2010-06-22T12:53:41","modified_gmt":"2010-06-22T10:53:41","slug":"net-neutrality-deal-near-betwen-fcc-and-telcos","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ofcourseimright.com\/?p=1027","title":{"rendered":"Net Neutrality Deal near betwen FCC and Telcos?"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"Today’s Wall Street Journal reports<\/a> that mega-telcos Verizon<\/a> and AT&T<\/a> are in discussions with senior staff of the Federal Communications Commission<\/a> (FCC) over a compromise for enabling legislation for the FCC to regulate access to the Internet.\u00a0 This is no small deal.\u00a0 Chairman Julius Genachowski has made very clear for quite some time that he thought there was a need to provide for some form of net neutrality<\/em> to protect customers against service providers, and to insure openness.\u00a0 Another thing is perfectly clear to everyone: the rules of the 1980s and 1990s certainly are antiquated.<\/p>\n

However, one problem with net neutrality<\/em> is that it can mean different things to different people.\u00a0 To some it might mean protection from service providers charging for services that they themselves do not provide.\u00a0 To others it might mean an inability for service providers to manage what they deem as excessive use of a shared resource (their network) by some consumers, as their cost models are all structured on the notion of over-subscription.\u00a0 That is\u2013 if everyone tried to use a vast amount of bandwidth at once, we would all get very little, and not those megabits\/second in the advertisement.<\/p>\n

Here are a few facts to think about when you hear the term net neutrality<\/em>:<\/p>\n