In fact, for many people who are always struggling to pay bills at the end of the month or carry a credit card balance that’s just a bit too high, the “novel” phrase price control might just sound like a good idea.

That having been said: as one who has thought a great deal about framing in technology law, kudos to you for your efforts. Now, please excuse me while I search for ways to undercut you.

That having been said: as one who has thought a great deal about framing in technology law, kudos to you for your efforts. Now, please excuse me while I search for ways to undercut you.

Keep up your blind devotion to the cause!

Love, Karl

Unregulated monopolies lead to loss of freedoms

Or

we can say:

Corporate control of basic public infrastructure leads to loss of individual freedoms

Net Neutrality, to me, is NOT about price control, it is about how the flow of data (roadway} is managed. While no one likes to be regulated, at a fundamental level, a degree of regulation is necessary for society to operate. For example, to use a road analogy, we drive on the right hand side of the road and we do not drive 60MPH through a school zone.

In terms of the internet, lets assume that it is a toll road owned by a variety of private entities. Each entity can own a segment of road and/or individual lanes within that road. When I get on the internet, I would like to pay ONE fee to get onto the internet and have my packets go through in a standardized (neutral) fashion. Since many private entities own segments of the internet toll road, they could be paid on a prorated basis.

To me, those who oppose net-neutrality are advocating a process where a toll is collected every time you cross a “property” boundary. Not only that, the entity who owns that segment of internet road can establish their own rules for who could or could not enter that road segment. In the extreme, the use of this private property right, can be counter productive. AOL for example has used proprietary interfaces which has caused interoperability problems.

I recognize, that property rights exist, however there needs to be a degree of recognition that for the internet to function effectively, a degree of regulation is needed. The rub of course is: How Much???????????

If the goal is to communicate the issue to the people in the center who haven’t made up their minds, “price controls” doesn’t do it.

But I do agree that the anti-regulation crowd has done an abysmal job of the grass-roots game. That’s not a traditional strength of the Telcos, and it sure is showing. There is enough support for NN on the part of the great unwashed that some sort of legislation is inevitable; it’s a radioactive issue for Reps in swing districts already.

I hasten to add that proponents of network price controls will take a cue from Chris and see your post as part of an insidious corporate rebranding campaign, you insdious corporate rebrander.

“Marxism has nothing to do with this, and doesn’t explain it. The terrorists were rich, not poor, so clearly by Marxist standards they weren’t oppressed. They did what they did out of hatred and that’s the only motive that makes sense.”

Meanwhile, the class Marxist is ranting and fuming in a language that even the professor can’t understand most of the time, and half the students are nodding at me, “makes sense.

Most of the extra explanation is lost on the average person anyway. They probably wouldn’t know what to think of the extra details.

“Marxism has nothing to do with this, and doesn’t explain it. The terrorists were rich, not poor, so clearly by Marxist standards they weren’t oppressed. They did what they did out of hatred and that’s the only motive that makes sense.”

Meanwhile, the class Marxist is ranting and fuming in a language that even the professor can’t understand most of the time, and half the students are nodding at me, “makes sense.

Most of the extra explanation is lost on the average person anyway. They probably wouldn’t know what to think of the extra details.