Neu Turd

Net Neutrality: The Real Issue Behind the AT&T/BellSouth Showdown

Are you kidding? Google has to spend MILLIONS on the bandwidth necessary to host their site/services. Heck, the YouTube founders were having to raise over $1 million dollars per month just to pay the bandwidth and hosting fees associated with their site, well before Google came to recognize its value. Adding fees on the other end of the line would likely prevent the next YouTube, MySpace, Digg, Ebay, Wikipedia,or Yahoo from ever happening.

The "regulation" argument against net neutrality is pure telecom spin. While the term 'net neutrality' may not have been coined until relatively recently, it has nonetheless has been the established practice that has allowed the rise of web titans like Google to come into existence in the first place. Having the congress or FCC impose a tiered web like the one major ISP's are so desperate to get <b>would be the real regulation</b> of the web that needs to be opposed.

Even *if* AT&amp;T's arguments are true that the rising popularity of web video and services like Skype are saturating the capacity of their lines, whose fault is that? It sure isn't the consumers fault if more people are actually <i>using the services they already pay for<i>. It isn't anybody else's fault if AT&amp;T has oversold more bandwidth to consumers than AT&amp;T can actually supply. Their is no reason web innovators should be forced to bail them out of a mess they made for themselves.

If you like at how many billions of dollars the Baby Bells have spent to put AT&amp;T back together again(mostly), it far exceeds what it would to have cost to deliver a fiber connection to every home in America.