Comments on: Google’s Internet “Fast Lane”

By: Hey, Remember 2008′s Neutrality Debate?

Hey, Remember 2008′s Neutrality Debate? — Mon, 16 Aug 2010 22:28:29 +0000

[...] Google’s Internet “Fast Lane” [...]

By: Helen Atwood

Helen Atwood — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 08:40:00 +0000

your blog is awsome

By: Elsie M Aiken

Elsie M Aiken — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 07:15:08 +0000

Excellent, entertaining, useful reading, Thanks !!

By: nutrition foods

nutrition foods — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 18:51:58 +0000

Thanks for the info. May God have mercy on us all.

By: Coming to an ISP Near You: Google Servers | Cord Blomquist

Coming to an ISP Near You: Google Servers | Cord Blomquist — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 06:19:37 +0000

[...] Me on whether or not Google violated net neutrality and whether or not it really matters [...]

By: TPW 38: The Google Kerfuffle — Edge Caching & Net Neutrality - The Technology Liberation Front

Fri, 19 Dec 2008 04:48:36 +0000

[...] this week. Cord Blomquist of the Competitive Enterprise Institute wrote about the issue here and here, and Bret Swanson of the Progress & Freedom Foundation wrote about it here and here. To help [...]

By: Coming to an ISP Near You: Google Servers | OpenMarket.org

Coming to an ISP Near You: Google Servers | OpenMarket.org — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 05:55:12 +0000

[...] Me on whether or not Google violated net neutrality and whether or not it really matters [...]

By: Bret Swanson

Bret Swanson — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 21:01:27 +0000

Great analysis, Cord.

By: Scott Cleland

Scott Cleland — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 13:42:08 +0000

Excellent post. Thanks for adding to the understanding of the grey area of caching and CDNs. Smart network innovation like Limelight is how the Internet will stay current to meet its ever expanding demands. I am amazed how net neutrality proponents think freezing in place a thirty year old design is innovation. It is a selective ban on network innovation to favor silicon valley innovation.

Scott Cleland, Chairman, NetCompetition.org

By: Richard Bennett

Richard Bennett — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 06:46:58 +0000

Neutrality presupposes the telecom scenario where all users seek the same level of service, so it's always been a force-fit onto the Internet. I'd like to see some mandates for terms of service disclosure and the traditional ban on anti-competitive practices and let the rest play out. Historically, the Internet has been a single-service network, but that's probably not what we want it to be in the future. This blow-up over Google illustrates the friction between different varieties of network neutrality WRT to common practice on the Internet, so it's a teachable moment for the idealists.

By: Edge-Caching vs. Preferential Treatment - The Technology Liberation Front

Edge-Caching vs. Preferential Treatment - The Technology Liberation Front — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 06:18:03 +0000

[...] that Google has abandoned its stance on network neutrality have been thoroughly debunked, as Cord and Adam note below. Over at Broadband Reports, Karl Bode explains that Google is seeking [...]

By: cordblomquist

cordblomquist — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 05:53:18 +0000

Thanks Richard. I'm trying to write longer posts that think through issues, rather than just assert my point of view. There's enough of that going on already.

Net neutrality is an interesting question to me. Neutrality is a good rule, but I don't think it should be the law. Mostly because the exception to the neutrality could prove to be incredibly useful, especially in cases where large amounts of data needs to flow from centralized servers to end users. This is why LimeLight and other non-neutral, proprietary systems make sense. It also seems that they can only exist when tied into a larger, neutral network.

By: Net Neutrality & the White Hot Spotlight of Public Attention - The Technology Liberation Front

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 01:45:35 +0000

[...] front-page story on Google’s edge caching plan and whether it violates Net neutrality. (See Cord’s post and Bret’s). Lessig calls it a “made-up drama“, David Isenberg says it’s [...]

By: Richard Bennett

Richard Bennett — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 01:40:55 +0000

Nice piece.