6 comments

• 

  cordblomquist

  10 months ago

  This is absolutely excellent. But do we think that Comcast reacted so quickly because of public pressure or because that public pressure could translate into political pressure? If neutrality wasn't a politicized issue would Comcast have backed down on the neutrality issue?
  reply
• 

  Tim Lee

  10 months ago

  Well, obviously it's hard to be sure. I can't read the minds of Comcast's executives, and we can't predict what the world would look like had NN never become a political issue. And indeed, I'm not sure we can cleanly separate the two. A lot of people who support network neutrality also support network neutrality regulation. They don't necessarily delineate the two the way libertarians do. So I'm not sure you can clearly separate the "political backlash" from the "market backlash." Many of Comcast's critics wore both a "customer" hat and a "voter" hat. Both hats gave them reason to pay attention to what they had to say.
  
  In any event, it's clear that more regulation isn't necessary. Some combination of market forces and the threat of regulatory intervention is making broadband incumbents behave themselves. I'm not entirely comfortable with the second half of that equation, but either way, enacting formal regulations has considerable downsides and no real upside.
  reply
• 

  Kevin D

  10 months ago

  Cord's point is what I thought of.
  
  I actually think the best thing we can do for net neutrality (as a desired goal but fearful of government's hand) is to have dedicated activists like Save the Internet dual with smart responders like you guys at Cato. Though the sustainability of that is questionable...
  reply
• 

  Richard Bennett

  10 months ago

  Don't they call this "negotiating in the shadow of the law" or something like that?
  reply
• 

  Number9

  10 months ago

  "If we do start to see real evidence that technological and market forces are inadequate to protect the neutral Internet, there will be plenty of time to debate and pass appropriate regulations at that point."
  
  So you essentially do agree with the principle of net neutrality, but you don't think that it is necessary to implement at the moment because it hasn't been violated yet. On one hand, I'd like to see a preventative solution to make sure there is no lasting damage done if it finally does occur. On the other hand, it's pretty easy to over-regulate or miss something when we don't know exactly how net neutrality will be violated.
  
  "filtering and blocking tools network providers do have are clumsy and easily circumvented. There are plenty of people monitoring broadband providers’ behavior, and they will ensure that any network neutrality violations get widely publicized."
  
  Let's not get stuck in the bubble here. Most people don't even know that filtering exists or what net neutrality is. The "publicity" that violations will generate will only reach people who have been following the debate or happened to catch a very simplified explanation of net neutrality on a Youtube video. One thing I don't know enough about, though: was there a huge consumer backlash against Comcast for its filtering? The web certainly had its share of debate, but I don't recall it being something the mainstream new about.
  reply
• 

  Tim Lee

  10 months ago

  So you essentially do agree with the principle of net neutrality, but you don't think that it is necessary to implement at the moment because it hasn't been violated yet.
  
  Network neutrality the technical principle was "implemented" back in the 1980s. I think the record so far suggests that non-regulatory forces will be sufficient to preserve it.
  
  One thing I don't know enough about, though: was there a huge consumer backlash against Comcast for its filtering? The web certainly had its share of debate, but I don't recall it being something the mainstream new about.
  
  Well, obviously it got the most attention among customers who use BitTorrent and techies who are paying close attention to the debate. Since most mainstream users don't use BitTorrent, they didn't pay much attention. But this is precisely why I think more ambitious attempts at network discrimination will get more attention. if Comcast tried to block something that most people do use, like YouTube, CNN, or World of Warcraft, you'd see a proportionately bigger public backlash.
  reply