[Bradford] Fwd: DEAPPG Panel Event on Net Neutrality: A Briefing paper

[Thomas Mangin]

> Interesting comments.
> I think that if we don't have Net neutrality it will stifle innovation and promote protectionism. 

It may or it may _hurt_ innovation. My opinion is that the issue is so complex ( _noone_ use the same definition of net neutrality, how can you legiferate a concept which is not clearly defined) that whatever law passed will have many unforsee consequence.
See how the DMCA is used to prevent users to buy generic printer ink for an example of law mis-usage.

> For example: My contract, with T-Mobile, gives me 3GB of data. However, I only use a tiny part of this and I can't use voip (directly) because they block it.

T-Mobile sold you a DATA service, which mean a non VOIP service, better defined as a web and mail service only if your read the footprint ...

They block VOIP as their business model is to sell you a cheap phone, or to be exact to give it to you, and make you pay for it part of your plan. The call are where the network makes its revenue, and this is why they do not want you to use VOIP as it would be allowing third party to use their network, without taking any of the risk associated with running a network (and as well avoiding quite a few expensive legislation, like data retention for call, etc.) and make money out of it.

The DATA service is a way to generate extra revenue from their PHONE infrastructure, and this revenu must be EXTRA and not reduce the income they get from their phone market ....

As well, the price you are paying for your 3G is based on a 10:1 contention. In order to make the product cheap, they did not provision for 3GB for you, but only 300Mb as statistically people only use 1/10 of what they bought. Should this ratio change so would the price. 

I you ever bought a Leased Line and compared the price with a DSL circuit you will see the price difference between guaranteed service and contended service (that said even BT does not sell 1:1 service anymore on 21CN .. different discussion tho). As well, 3G networks are NATed, often twice. So running VOIP is never going to be a smooth experience. (<publicity>That said if you want a real IP on a 3G SIM, feel free to contact me :p </publicity>)

> Now, I have called them to voice my disgust at their policy.

As they do not care as all their competitor have the same policy. The barrier to entry is high in this industry so their is only a few players, you are already in a quasi monopoly situation.

> They retort with the offer of letting me use voip but pay more.

Logical.

> My argument is that if I fill up my car, and pay for the petrol, I expect to take my car wherever I want to use up that petrol. What if someone was to restrict what I could use my car for,  then say they want the unused petrol back at the end of the month? That is just what T-Mobile is doing.

No, you SIGNED a contract with T-Mobile which says you can NOT use VOIP. Like you have "signed" a contract with the society which does not allow you to drive at more than 30 MPH in town center even if your car _clearly_ allows you to do so.

> Further, it is protectionism. They fear that people would use voip for cheaper phone calls - in my case I am only interested in incoming voip calls, as I don't use my quota of voice minutes,  but that is beside the point.

You care about cheap cost, you do not care who pays for the infrastructure. However by looking at _your_ need and not the whole picture, you do not realise that by only caring about it YOU are taking a clear stance against Network neutrality. As NN can only exists if end users a paying their fair share of the network. By trying to bypass your mobile operator cost you clearly telling them that they are right to block.
You do not care about what it cost to deliver the service (understandably), only how much it costs you .. this is the wrong reason to advocate NN (there is some good but this is another long mail and not the one Google or Skype are going to put forward).

> I don't have a landline and have, for many years, just used voip. What if Virgin cable were to mess with voip and make it unusable. Well, yes, I could ditch them and go elsewhere but sometimes providers follow each other in their actions and so choice can disappear as a result, perhaps, of a covert cartel.

Many provider offer better unlimited package for more money, the issue is that everyone want the content of the higher package for the price of the lower. This will not change, this is human nature.
At MacDO, no one would ask for a BIG mac meal for the price of a chesse burger but on the net it is ok as it is "virtual" ... Please keep in mind the infrastructure to deliver the service is NOT virtual. The free service like Facebook are NOT free they are paid by advertisers (and the stock market :p) The net is not Free, it just look like it .....

Thomas


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/bradford/attachments/20110329/ed15eaea/attachment-0001.htm>