?? I don't get the impression that the ISP's were lobbying for the net neutrality. They didn't want it.
So, they came up with these rules in case someday they decided to do this? I mean that is how it is reading to me so far. That's why I feel I'm missing something.
This doesn't address the capacity issue. The ISP's were having issues with services like Netflix due to capacity - and it wasn't due to throttling the speed so their videos couldn't play. The ISP's worked with Netflix over the capacity issue at the time, because that type of service wasn't available prior. It was a new thing for both of them, and no doubt something that wasn't thought about prior.
In the past the ISP would open up another port, and in exchange the other site return some downstream as a business courtesy. Netflix can't do that, because they don't do the downstream. It was for sure a bottleneck for both.
The ISP customers were ticked, and they heard about it. Netflix wasn't so thrilled themselves, because they can't keep subscribers - and do anything for the ISP customers with capacity that is tapped OUT! You have no winners there. Not the ISP nor Netflix. So they worked out the capacity issue together. It was fixed.
I'm getting the impression that people got the wrong idea about this complex happening, and felt the ISP's were purposely slowing Netflix down...lol just because they are a big old meanie corporation and those types just do that type of thing. In reality they were giving away bandwidth, and getting nothing in return - as the current arrangement in the past with other sites (downstream was the return). So, they went to Netflix and worked an agreement out that benefits both organizations.
Since the community at large felt it was just the big old meanie ISP throttling the speeds? Creation of Net Neutrality to solve a problem that doesn't exist. Maybe it fixes something else I'm NOT aware of, but it was based on a false premise if throttling was the reason for the 'creation'. It's not like it was the first time government got something truly wrong, because they were so arrogant they knew more than others.
I mean if I were an ISP and had to pay for regulations/fees to the government for a problem that didn't exist - yet that is what was sold to the public as the problem? I'd be ticked! It be a money grab on a bill of goods dreamed up by government themselves.
There has to be more to it than this. Throttling can be covered by law anyway, because that is anti competitive practices. lol then your in trouble with more than just the FCC!
What you are missing is the Comcast (and Verizon) was actually throttling Netflix delivery to their customers, prior to the deal with Netflix going through. It was verified by a number of people doing tests, such as using a VPN over a Comcast connection (where Comcast couldn't tell it was a Netflix video). Comcast was also caught doing it with P2P traffic.
Of course, the bigger fear now is that companies will speed up traffic they own, and slow competitors. So, as an example, Comcast owns NBC/Universal -- so the thought is they'll speed up video from the services they own and slow competitors. Perhaps an even better example is that Verizon owns Yahoo, so they could ensure Yahoo searches and news are very fast but slow Google down, to help promote Yahoo.
The issue with this is that most Americans have few choices, particularly in respect to high speed Internet. Most Americans have one or two high speed Internet providers that they can access at their home -- so the "free market" doesn't work in this case. Cable companies are given monopolies in most local areas, that they were given in exchange for laying cable to the entire city. Most companies cannot purchase the necessary right of way to put cables in to run a high speed Internet service -- and even if they could, do you really want 10 different companies lines going across your property (either strung above ground on poles or below ground)? It is worth noting Google quit expanding their Google Fiber (cheap high speed Internet) because of these exact type of issues, the problem of trying to wire various communities, particularly with the rights cable companies own in many localities -- and if they don't find it worth their time, as a multi-billion dollar company, what chance does some new company have of doing it?
I hear satellite brought up, but it does not truly offer high speed data, particularly since it still basically requires a "land line" to upload data (send from your location back to their servers). I've heard some complain that people don't need high speed, but that just isn't really true. A family may have 4 people on the Internet at any given time; when you have one person watching video on a TV (possibly even at 4K resolution), another possibly gaming, you could have a third either watching video or maybe just streaming the Internet, and a forth on the Internet as part of their homework -- you need to have a good amount of sustained speed.
Cell phones you have 4 basic choices, and for most Americans maybe 2 of those networks will work well in the locations they need to use their phones -- though hopefully that is improving. The other problem is that they intend you to use your service on your phone, it isn't good for providing your family with Internet service in your home -- particularly since most reserve the right to throttle your data after you've used 20GB; by contrast Comcast's Home Internet generally gives you 1000 GB before you run into issues. Additionally, to start a new cellular network is extremely hard to do, as you need to "buy" wireless spectrum from the government -- and all current spectrum is already owned. While the government is trying to create more -- largely by moving UHF TV channels -- it is extremely competitive and expensive to buy the spectrum as it becomes available.
In essence, the issue is that the Internet, where the customer buys it, is not a "free market" but instead there are frequently local monopolies, and even where there is no monopoly it is cost prohibitive to start a new ISP. So this "free market" that they talk about keeping ISP's from throttling is a myth, as whether you are talking wireless or wired connections, it is still controlled by the various levels of government. Repealing Net Neutrality does not fix this.
