The example of craigslist being throttled does suck – but it’s unrelated to the origins of the Net Neutrality proposal which was originally conceived to block the sale of premium pipes to publishers who would far rather we (consumers) foot that bill. Web publishers have shrewdly coupled the concept of “not blocking” access to their primary agenda of blocking “premium publisher services”. It’s classic politics and it doesn’t belong on the web.

If the telco’s were asking for legislation allowing throttling, I’d be writing letters to my congressman – or switching ISP’s – they are not – that’s just another example of the misinformation around this issue. You are right, the debate is not about consumers paying for more bandwidth (read my comment); it’s about publishers chipping in as-and-when more bandwidth is required.

If I am missing something, please link to a proposal by the telco’s that advocates for throttling or blocking access – from my understanding that threat is another fabrication but if I’m wrong, I’ll definitely consider changing my opinion.

The example of Craigslist being throttled by an ISP (that just happen to compete with them in the classified ads business) is just a small example of what the large ISPs would surely be tempted to do should they be allowed.

In my opinion, this issue is not about allowing users to pay extra for faster service. This debate is about whether or not ISP can limit what you can realistically see on the web. Sure, they may still “allow” access to a site, but if they throttle a site so that a page takes so long to download that it “times out” then you are not really able to access that site.

As an immigrant, I admit to starting off with a bias against the idea of any one country creating legislation around web access. Personally, I think that the internet’s freedom from such controls is (partly) responsible for its success. How would you feel if the UK government created laws that impacted your web experience? So, I was skeptical when I heard about Net Neutrality & looked into it further;

Granted that the telco’s don’t have the most trustworthy track-record but Net Neutrality is flawed in that it fails to acknowledge reality; i.e. that consumers of internet access already choose the speed with which they log on (dial-up vs ISDN vs cable etc.) and that they pay accordingly. Likewise, web publishes pay for the bandwidth required to serve their content. There are real costs associated with delivery of web traffic. There’s nothing wrong with the current system.

With the growth in rich media online, the gap between bandwidth haves and have-nots is widening. Soon, standard cable may not cut it for heavy users of web-based-TV. Under the current model, consumers would have to buy bigger pipes. That’s fine but some people won’t – and publishers will miss out on those revenues. From my understanding, the telco’s were proposing a solution to that problem. They want to sell products to web publishers that contribute to the consumer’s portion of the bandwidth cost.

The telcos (ISP’s) want to sell services that guarantee a great web experience on a site-by-site basis, for ALL consumers, even those who’d typically have too little bandwidth. Maybe I’m naïve, but this just seems like a win-win to me. Publishers are the ones monetizing eye-balls; they would have had a new way to proactively grow their audience if only they hadn’t invented Net Neutrality to block this innovation.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not advocating that web publishers actually buy this product and I’m not even sure that anyone would. What I am saying is that the telco’s should have the right to (try to) sell whatever they want – because that’s how free markets work, and that’s what makes capitalism great, and that’s the spirit of freedom that has built the web into the fascinating and useful space it is today.

Note: I work at Zillow.com; this comment is my opinion, and not my employer’s.

I’m definitely with you on this one…

I don’t think people realize just how important it is that a few companies (the ones willing to pay!) are not given a special pipeline on the internet that makes their sites perform fundamentally better than other sites!