I recently put a paper online in the VoIP community that was sort of a survey document of some of the thoughts and opinions on the whole issue of net Neutrality. As yet, I've not come out with a strong opinion either way. Colleague Ted Wallingford posted this last week -

Net Neutrality is the Wrong Frame

With all due respect to Jeff Pulver and to the rest of the gang (including yours truly) that have been breathing life into the idea of Net Neutrality, we in the tech industry have done a lousy job framing the debate with the telcos. Martin Geddes is right when he says that "... network neutrality law is a tactical, practical, strategic and philosophical error."

But I would offer a simpler formula than Martin for what does need to be done. And as an aside, simpler is part of the lesson that the tech industry needs to learn if we are going to be successful in the political realm

Ted's post brings a lot of common sense to the issue, and gives the active voice a chance to respond. And none did. Ted's widely read and the fact that nobody in the limelight of the issue says something to me personally. Like me, Ted's getting spammed by the fabricated grassroots campaing that's really the telco industry in sheep's clothing. I get those and more. But that's simply the telecom industry doing what it does - lobbying and flooding the atmosphere with FUD to push the issue their direction.

One of the reasons I haven't had much to say about the issue is because there are so many valid points and so much bogus fluff on both sides of the issue that it's really hard to tell what the real issue is.

On one side there are people who want the open natures of the Internet to continue. Since even IP, the basic protocol of the Internet, was created for openness and interoperability, this is the very nature of the Net. Yet these same people use the silly argument "infprmation wants to be free" in a feeble and flawed effort eo embue data (binary ones and zeros) with some sentient personality that is just laughable.

On the other side we have for profit businesses who carry traffic and want to make a profit. In a free enterprise world, I find it hard to counter this approach. We're in business to make money. Yet, they have collected payments, subsidies and special dispensation to build out network capacity that they never built and doesn't exist. Their honor is often in question.

Is it reasonable for a carrier to charge extra for guaranteed quality of service? Absolutely in my mind. Should carriers gouge customers and get paid multiple times for the same infrastructure? Not likely.

If this issue is one that interest you, stay tuned. The VoIP ThinkTank is convening to record our next podcast, and Net Neutrality is one of the main topics for our conversation. I expect you'll hear some different opinions from the group.


Technorati Tags: Net Neutrality, VoIP ThinkTank