Forging a deal for net neutrality

The Federal Communications Commission has extended a comment period on restricting Internet service providers from playing favorites. The extension marks yet another delay in what has become a tortured pursuit of rules to keep the Internet as it is now - open and accessible for everyone. The issue is no small matter; a decision to impose regulations will ripple beyond the lives of most Americans. Net neutrality rules, if properly drafted, will safeguard the universal access and competition that have made the Internet such an engine for innovation.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/45371.html

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski is putting together a net neutrality proposal and plans to take action on the controversial issue as early as next month, according to several sources with knowledge of the situation.

Details of the proposal being developed by Genachowski’s office are unclear, but sources say it could be similar to the deal stakeholders tried to reach with Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) earlier this fall.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/45371.html

I asked about this here a while back and I must have misunderstood just about everything.

I was told the only effort to control content has come from the government and not the providers.

I have been told net neutrality rule would prohibit providers from charging different rates based on types of use within the agreed upon level of service,such as down loading operations, movies .

Isn't this service a product ,that is private property, for which the provider is entitled to be paid?

Is it correct if a another user and myself have the same level of service within the same finite amount of available bandwidth, and the other user down loads or watches live streaming or some heavy use, net neutrality would mean our provider must not charge him more than I am charged even though his activity diminishes the quality and quantity and thus the value of the service received by myself and all others?

I have read and heard some people holding themselves out as conservatives say they are for net neutrality as a method to avoid censorship or some form of control.

My understanding is that net neutrality rule would be like if an operator of a crawfish and crab buffet reastaurant , offered as the only choice all you-can-eat one price for all .

The operator noticed my neighbor was not taking the customary few crawfish and few crabs at a time and returning to his table . Instead with his plate as full of crawfish and crab as mine, he stood in front of the crab tank blocking out all others ,eating them at 10 times my rate, so often I would get only one crab during the same time he ate 10. I complain .

Is it correct Net Neutrality would prevent the operator from changing his price schedule to allow the all you-can-eat base price to continue , but with the addition of a charge for blocking the crab well?

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.