Canadian Regulator Puts Foot Down On Net Neutrality
While the Trump administration has rolled back consumer protections on net neutrality in the USA, the Canadian CRTC has come out firmly in favour of it <https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/04/21/canada_net_neutrality/>. It has said that “zero rating”--the practice of ISPs favouring certain online services by not counting them towards data caps, is bad because differential pricing practices, generally speaking, result in (a) a preference toward certain subscribers over others, (b) a preference toward certain content providers over others, (c) a disadvantage to subscribers who are not eligible for, or interested in, a differential pricing practice offering, and (d) a disadvantage to content providers that are not eligible for, or included in, an offering. In other words, they are anticompetitive, no matter what some may try to argue.
I wrote:
While the Trump administration has rolled back consumer protections on net neutrality in the USA, the Canadian CRTC has come out firmly in favour of it ...
Been reading more of the actual CRTC decision <http://crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2017/2017-104.htm>, and came across this striking statement: 51. Professor van Schewick submitted that differential pricing practices would end the era when entrepreneurs are free to innovate without permission, which is a core net neutrality principle that has fostered innovation up until now. “Free to innovate without permission” is exactly right. That is the difference between the distributed Internet, and the centrally-controlled telephone system. Those who want to get rid of net neutrality want to turn the Internet into another telephone system.
participants (1)
-
Lawrence D'Oliveiro