21–30 of 111 posts
If you won't challenge Netflix's argument, then it's your word against theirs. And one of those two companies isn't trying to become the largest ISP in the country.
Really it's Comcast's customers who are using Netflix and those customers are paying them for an X Mbps connection. I don't see what difference it makes if the data comes from Netflix or some other source. It sounds like what Comcast really wants are data caps for their users but those don't do well with consumers. Instead they're targeting the largest content suppliers.
" I call BS Comcast, You had larger transit networks in place and refused to activate them until Netflix paid. That has nothing to do with costs to consumers. They are just murdering your antiquated business model and you keep crying foul. Fios is a much better product than anything you offer."
It is currently being moderated by "Comcast Voices", lets see how much they support a Open Internet.
Where's the actual response, there's more disclaimer than content there
----
Certain statements in this communication regarding the alleged superfluity of disclaimers, including any statements regarding the expected length of such disclaimers, benefits and synergies of the disclaimers, future opportunities for the more disclaimers, and any other statements regarding future expectations, beliefs, plans, objectives, financial conditions, assumptions or future events or performance that are not historical facts are statements made within the meaning of RFC 1438.
You lost me at "No ISP in the country has been a stronger supporter of the Open Internet than Comcast" I'm sorry Comcast but if you can't fullfil our agreement (Internet access) then you aren't an ISP in my mind. I pay you for an Internet connection, not for the ability to send packets at someone else -- they get to respond to me as well, that's part of our deal.
http://www.attpublicpolicy.com/consumers-2/who-should-pay-fo...
Particularly because the comments on the AT&T page by its own customers completely demolish the argument.
These ISPs are seriously arguing that the cost to upgrade their own networks to deliver the content their own customers are requesting should fall on the other side of the link. They're arguing this apparently even after Netflix/Akamai/etc have build CDNs to deliver the content right next to their subscribers. They're not even having to build a backbone.
There may be one, but this isn't a very compelling argument as to why large content providers should need to pay Comcast.
"Internet interconnection has nothing to do with net neutrality; it’s all about Netflix wanting to unfairly shift its costs from its customers to all Internet customers, regardless of whether they subscribe to Netflix or not." Really it's Comcast's customers who are using Netflix and those customers are paying them for an X Mbps connection. I don't see what difference it makes if the data comes from Netflix or some o…
With this logic, why should anyone have to pay for hosting bandwidth?