Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 1st Jun 2011 22:38 UTC
Internet & Networking Because OSNews is technically a site from the US, and because the technology industry is decidedly a US-centric industry, we often talk about US politics having adverse effects on technology - or, the other way around. That's why I've been detailing the political movements here in The Netherlands with regards to net neutrality. After a lot of positive news, I've now got some bad news - bad news that involves the largest political party trying to block net neutrality - because one of its members of parliament, Afke Schaart, is a former KPN employee. And yes, KPN is the carrier that first announced it was going to block and throttle traffic.
Thread beginning with comment 475625
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Berend de Boer
Member since:
2005-10-19

Should amazon be allowed to enter into an agreement with an ISP to charge customers higher prices to access other bookstore websites?


Bad example: Amazon has entered into examples with ISPs to give customers "free" access to the Amazon site, i.e. Whispernet.

Unfair!!!! Should be forbidden! The government should step in with its heavy boots and send people to jail for this.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

Berend de Boer,

"Bad example: Amazon has entered into examples with ISPs to give customers 'free' access to the Amazon site, i.e. Whispernet."

You're talking about the amazon kindle, right?

It's an interesting business model.

"Magazines, newspapers and blogs via RSS are provided by Amazon per a monthly subscription fee or a free trial period. Newspaper subscriptions cost from US$1.99 to $27.99 per month; magazines charge between $1.25 and $10.99 per month, and blogs charge from $0.99 to $1.99 per month."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Kindle

They do charge owners a per megabyte fee for transfer of personal documents to the kindle over 3G.

Of course you mention amazon's own site being free for users. Should they be allowed to do that?

I would argue "no" unless competitor's services are also available for the same price (aka "free").

The reasoning is that if this approach were scaled up to more and more providers such that it became the norm, the web would become fragmented. Users would have to use the services endorsed by their ISPs instead of the services which best suit them. ISP customers would be for sale to the highest bidder. Small publishers/developers would be excluded from the market and users would ultimately end up with fewer choices, less innovation, and stronger monopolies.

Reply Parent Score: 3