Yesterday the FCC endorsed the Network Neutrality concept, which seems to be inspiring warm fuzzies all around the net-freedom-lovin’ community. I’m no expert on the legalities, but it seems intuitive that protecting the freedom of the internet would be a good thing. On the other hand, is regulation the right way to protect freedom?
If the web is allowed to go on unfettered, the argument goes, corporate interests will run rampant and take it over, just like my formerly gritty SoHo neighborhood. Get some cool stuff going on in that there internet and before you know it, the whole thing is a mall- a mall with mean security guards.
Such a scenario is not so implausible, and in the case of media, there does seem to be a strong possibility in my mind that service providers such as Comcast will partner with copyright holders like Disney and Warner Bros. to clamp down on the available means to access media except in proscribed and monetized ways.
In that regard, artists might be more interested in creating their own satellite network than trying to make semi-enforceable rules- for real. One of the main points of contention is that the network was publicly built, after all; perhaps that could be an interesting NEA project.
Bandwidth caps are one of the best ways for Comcast, Time Warner, etc. to keep a handle on what’s available on their network, and aren’t addressed by NN. A company is within their rights to expect people to pay more for greater usage. Net Neutrality will likely end the flat rate per-month broadband pricing for consumers. That may not a good thing for filmmakers marketing their films- people may become a lot more selective with what they are going to spend their bandwidth on.
The freedoms espoused in the Net Neutrality platform- and the ones added by the FCC- are awesome, theoretically. It’s a bit like a digital bill of rights. For my money (currently being flung around in Washington like rice at a wedding) I might take net neutrality, without regulation. It could be used for legal action but not be a reason for a bunch of regulators on retainer. Let the market control things in general, but individuals have recourse against egregious offenders. But his is probably not really feasible.
What are your thoughts on Net Neutrality? Do you think it’s good for content creators? Will it solve the problems you have with viewing/sharing media online?
- DISCUSS THIS Post in discussion
- BROWSE / IN TIMELINE
- « Independent Film Week starts tomorrow- network!
- » Netflix is a theatrical tool
- BROWSE / IN broadband cable politics
- « The Politics of Broadband pt. 2: Net Neutrality
- » Comcast talking to NBC- what does it matter to indie film?
COMMENTS / 2 COMMENTS
Dallas added these pithy words on Sep 24 09 at 1:54 pmI think it’s as simple as answering the point raised, which is “…is regulation the right way to protect freedom?”
It’s quite an ethical double standard to say that we need to use state coercion to ensure freedoms. Obviously I don’t agree that the government should regulate the free market, but of course they already have and so any argument in favor of net neutrality may make some sense in undoing past government screw ups, but it seems to me that trying to enforce how isp’s operate is just like trying to cover a lie with another lie. In the end dishonesty can never work!
JC added these pithy words on Sep 25 09 at 12:00 amIf the government truly is only RECOMMENDING net neutrality, and will not enforce the preference through regulation, then there is no double standard. And what of the double standard the corporate cartel desired, where the big ISPs would have gotten the state to forcibly subsidize the demise of neutrality, while the big boys monopolize the profits delivered by the unequal playing field?
SPEAK / ADD YOUR COMMENT
Comments are moderated.
