<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3492" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2></FONT> </DIV><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
[mailto:isolatedn@gmail.com] <BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>
<DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN-LEFT: 40px"><EM>Wouldn't there be a balance if we seriously
begin to be open to the concerns expressed by the business sector to SOME
aspects of the 'discrimination' - a bad word, but may have to be permissible
[in a certain context]. If a Virginia uses the Internet for business email and
essential surfing, and Robert [co-panelist] is using it to download movies
24/7, what is wrong if Virginia is charged $10 and Robert a
$100? </EM><SPAN class=842172917-09012009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2> </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN-LEFT: 40px"><SPAN class=842172917-09012009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN-LEFT: 40px"><SPAN class=842172917-09012009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Siva, there is nothing wrong, indeed, a pricing regime
that charges users more based on what bandwidth they actually use is
scientifically known to be better for smaller users, who end up subsidizing
bandwidth hogs under many flat-rate regimes. If you care about
affordability you want price discrimination in this sense.
</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN-LEFT: 40px"><SPAN class=842172917-09012009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN-LEFT: 40px"><SPAN class=842172917-09012009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>The main point I want to make is that charging more for
more bandwidth use is NOT a net neutrality issue at all. This is unfortunately
how the economic equalitarians have diverted and potentially destroyed the
concept. NN has to do with anti-competitive or censorial discrimination among
applications, services or content based on the origin or destination of the
packets. Full stop. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN-LEFT: 40px"><SPAN class=842172917-09012009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN-LEFT: 40px"><SPAN class=842172917-09012009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>We need to liberate the NN discussion from the efforts of
economic equalitarians to appropriate the term in order to sell Maoist snake
oil. Economic equalitarianism of the sort that says Virginia and Robert should
get the same price for very different services and consumption rates is just
plain dumb; it isn;t economically sustainable, and won't survive as a
political or regulatory movement. So linking NN to this is a sure way to
defeat it -- as the IGP paper warned over a year ago. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN-LEFT: 40px"><SPAN class=842172917-09012009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN-LEFT: 40px"><SPAN class=842172917-09012009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2><!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<P><FONT size=2>Milton Mueller<BR>Professor, Syracuse University School of
Information Studies<BR>XS4All Professor, Delft University of
Technology<BR>------------------------------<BR>Internet Governance
Project:<BR><A
href="http://internetgovernance.org/">http://internetgovernance.org</A><BR></FONT></P></FONT></SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>