[discuss] African take on Net Neutrality
bzs at world.std.com
Sat May 17 19:10:17 UTC 2014
From: Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>
>Thanks a lot for providing such helpful clarification. I have a few more
>comments/question and concerns ;)
At your service.
Trimmed down to the questions...
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 7:19 PM, Barry Shein <bzs at world.std.com> wrote:
>> So the issue of whether this was anti-competitive arose since both Comcast
>> and Netflix are content (mostly professional video) providers.
>> Then Comcast said ok we'll sell it to you but you have to pay us a premium
>> because you're making all this money off our last-mile customers.
>Hmm...this is unfair, perhaps to further appreciate the situation. Could
>you kindly educate me on what "premium" really mean? does it mean comcast
>charges netflix more than the normal port cost?
It seems that's what Netflix CEO Reed Hastings is complaining about:
>Yeah i agree but not really a net neutrality issue per see. Issue of
>company monopoly happens in many countries for instance; government gives
>license to certain organisation and deny the rest even when they meet
>requirement. So you are right anti-trust and unfair competition is what
>could be at play here.
To me this is like saying it's not the germ it's the fever which is
killing the patient.
This is a symptom of an unregulated or under-regulated monopoly (or
very small-N oligopoly if someone wants to split that hair.)
Since it was built on government protected markets it is reasonable
for the govt to intervene.
Of course it might be reasonable even if it were not built on govt
protected markets but the fact that it was would seem to make their
jurisdiction more clear.
The World | bzs at TheWorld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
Software Tool & Die | Public Access Internet | SINCE 1989 *oo*
More information about the discuss