The US Justice Department has said that internet service providers should be allowed to charge for priority traffic. The agency said it was opposed to 'network neutrality', the idea that all data on the net is treated equally. The comments put the agency at odds with companies such as Microsoft and Google, who have called for legislation to guarantee equal access to the net.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-08
I think LobalSurgery is refering to this:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070815-east-coast-verizon-wa...
Member since:2006-09-07
http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/csgen.html
From the link:
In adopting the 1992 Cable Act, Congress stated that it wanted to...ensure cable operators do not have undue market power, and to ensure consumer interests are protected in the receipt of cable service. The Commission has adopted regulations to implement these goals.
However, in 1996:
In adopting the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Congress noted that it wanted to provide a pro-competitive, de-regulatory national policy framework designed to accelerate rapidly private sector deployment of advanced telecommunications and information technologies and services to all Americans by opening all telecommunications markets to competition. The Commission has adopted regulations to implement the requirements of the 1996 Act and the intent of Congress.
After de-regulation, competition still existed, but in many areas it was only for a short time, just until one provider could swallow all the rest.
Member since:2006-01-10
Exactly.
The same thing happened here in Canada.
Sure, they tried deregulating it.
At one time we had numerous cellphone companies.
Then, they all just bought out each other.
Rogers bought Fido for example (the only other GSM provider).
To top it off, they prevent foreign competition 
Great scam.
Member since:2005-07-06
When was the last time government intervention helped the telecom situation in the US?
The breakup of AT&T. Until then, my father tells me, you could only get two phones in the United States, and one of them (the "Princess" model) you got by paying more. AT&T wouldn't let residential customers hook anything else to their network.
I knew someone whose husband worked in AT&T's development department back then. She said AT&T's engineers hated management. They developed lots of nice things, and management was constantly refusing to implement them. Cost vs. anticipated benefit.
Member since:
2006-01-01
There was never any regulation that forced a cable or phone company to provide HSI. What deregulation do you mean?
The funny thing is that "Net Neutrality" would be a new regulation. When was the last time government intervention helped the telecom situation in the US?