Reply to post: "is that if it works WITHOUT new regulations, why add them NOW"

FCC boss slams new Californian net neutrality law, brands it illegal

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

"is that if it works WITHOUT new regulations, why add them NOW"

Because something that was unnecessary before now becomes necessary?

Before Internet behemoths arose, and some kind of offering became very lucrative, ISPs had very little reason to give different priorities to traffic. But now telcos are merging with content companies, and understood how the contents market could be lucrative, and suddenly they have incentives to act on the traffic they route to profit more, or hinder competition. At the expenses of users.

Netflix, for example could grow and become competitive because, say, Sky had no means to attempt to hinder it. Tomorrow Netflix could make a deal so its traffic is prioritized while competitors is not. It may mean Netflix could stream live events, maybe others could not.

Before cars, street regulations were much simpler. No traffic lights, signals, etc. Of course as soon as cars become widespread, faster, etc. regulations became needed to avoid a dangerous mess. Same for airplanes, when Wright brothers flew there was little need tor regulate it - today you have a very complex set of rules and a whole ATC system to enforce them. Think what would happen if airspace wasn't "neutral", and a few airlines owned it... do you believe, for example, that low-cost airlines would have been allowed to enter the market?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon