Bellsouth proposes internet fast-track

5 comments

Bellsouth proposes selectively serving some sites faster than others, echoing the opinion of AT & T.

"The chief technology officer for BellSouth Corp. said Internet service providers could charge Internet companies to deliver some Web sites faster than others.

William J. Smith also told reporters it seems reasonable his company (BLS) should be allowed to charge transmission fees to a competitor delivering phone service over the Net, the Washington Post reported.

Smith's comments echo statements a few weeks ago by the chief executive officer of AT&T (T) that his company should be able to charge for making publishers' Web sites accessible."

Comments

and people wonder why Google

and people wonder why Google is busy buying up dark fiber!

Singing from the same songsheet

> and people wonder why Google is busy buying up dark fiber!
I'm not sure they were future-proofing themselves against this type of move but dark fiber is probably a lot more difficult to find!

Bellsouth and AT&T collaborate on Cingular, one of the largest US mobile phone companies. With that kind of muscle the proposal probably has some teeth.

The genie is already out of the bottle

Charging more for a better grade of internet service at this point, beyond all of the currently excessive fees, is probably more of a push for a gentrification of the internet to squelch the voices of the masses of bloggers or slow them down at any rate and to also stem the tide of open source software which is taking a hit on their tech portfolios.

Everyone knows that the poor and downtrodden shouldn't be allowed the luxuries of the middle and uppper class and pricing things just out of their reach, even access to information, is how it's always been done historically with the only exception I can think of being public libaries.

Technologies like AdSense allow anyone with riches or not a pot to piss in to play on a level playing field over the internet so it looks like invoking tolls will thwart the flood of would be players.

OK, I'm rambling now...

I have no problem with it

It is just business.
If a big corporate site has more money than me then they'll have a bigger server with a better data centre and their sites will load faster. The only difference is that they can now go to the ISP(consumer end) to help server their sites faster.

I don't see any consumer voting with their ISP account and moving (other than the odd ranting webmaster who probably uses 300% more bandwidth than the average surfer anyway) - it will not change their experience. If the ISP was stupid enough to make restrict access to non paying sites that'd be a different scenario. But from what I can tell that is not the idea so I'm cool with this proposal.

and here's the problem with it ...

from the perspective of the user:

the isp has contracted to provide the user with access at a stipulated maximum throughput. a user would expect the performance of sites to vary. but, if a user knew that the isp favoured paying sites, then the isp is not serving the user to the best of their ability. are they?

the user is paying for the best performance the isp can provide without artificial chokepoints.

the response from some sites might well be a welcome page that says:

NOTICE: You are using Bellsouth as your isp.
Bellsouth has chosen to charge sites for enhanced
delivery to its paying users. We have chosen not
to pay a second time for what you have already
paid for as their customer. Please feel free to
come back when you have changed to a different isp.

nimrods.

actually,

nimrods 2.0

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.