[governance] What is Network Neutrality

[Sivasubramanian Muthusamy]

Hello Meryem Marzouki,

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 3:53 PM, Meryem Marzouki <marzouki at ras.eu.org> wrote:

>
> Le 9 janv. 09 à 07:19, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy a écrit :
>
>
>> 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?  The emotional point
>> of view would assert that both Virginia and Robert are charged equally, with
>> the result that Virginia subsidizes Robert by $40 which is unfair. This
>> aspect of Net Neutrality could be unfair to the user, for example.  [ Robert
>> responded by saying that he would like to pay a $100 ]
>>
>> I have a background in business and I am a businessman, with a total
>> commitment for Civil Society values. I will put on the businessman's hat and
>> ask you how I would survive as an ISP or Infrastructure provider if you
>> insist on me charging $10 each for Virginia and Robert? I don't have $80 to
>> subsidize Robert. How will I recoup my investments? How will I survive? More
>> important, how will I prosper?
>>
>
> Do I understand it right that you're advocating against flat access rates
> for ISP subscrivers, and in favor of a usage-based pricing system, i.e. back
> to the old dial-up times system?
> Note that, in any case, this is different from the net neutrality issue,
> whatever way the concept is framed.


I said that in the context of "*As an emotional topic, the phrase Network
Neutrality tends to stretch as a broader and broader theme to include just
about everything. And everything is opposed in the name of Net Neutrality."
*
In that context I was pointing out that some Network Neutrality proponents
tend to oppose variable pricing by bandwidth providers. The old dialup based
pricing system wherein we paid by the minute (not unlike the telecom model)
is unfair, but it is also true that a blind flat rate which results in the
non-user subsidizing the real user is unfair.

Differential pricing need not take us back to the dial up, pay by the minute
system, even the unlimited usage plans could be clustered to group users who
require 256 Kbps and those who require 10 Mbps. I felt that there is nothing
wrong with that.

Civil Society as a stakeholder does not consider that Business as a
stakeholder and Government as a stakeholder is evil. Multi stakeholderism
wouldn't work if one stakeholder group is completely closed to the the
concerns of the other groups. I was trying to think along the concerns of
Business as a stakeholder on one of the deviations in some Net Neutrality's
debates.

Thank you





>
>
> Meryem Marzouki____________________________________________________________
>
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>    governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>    governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>
> For all list information and functions, see:
>    http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>



-- 
Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
http://twitter.com/isocchennai
http://wealthyworld.blogspot.com
http://www.circleid.com/members/3601/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20090109/e3b3373a/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance