net neutrality is *not* about who pays for the internet hardware

Telecoms giants threaten freedom and equality on net while most folks fume about equal access, they are unprepared for a key argument of the anti-neutrality crowd. i found this line of reasoning quoted in the above article: "...behind the speeches and slogans urging politicians to maintain freedom and equality on the web, there is an argument about who should pay for the urgent need to upgrade the internet..." so the argument would be that, if we want the telcos to upgrade the system, then we have to allow them to change the rules about who gets charged and who gest access? - rubbish! but buried in all the hype is another anti-consumer decision made last year the the u.s. supreme court. known as the "brand x" decision, it ruled that while current law forces telephone companies to offer equal access to all, internet providers over *cable lines* did not have to do the same. so this upcoming bill is more about giving the telcos the same 'right of refusal' as the cable companies. instead of fixing the existing law to make cable companies offer equal access, the current congress is poised to offer the same 'anti-neutrality' rights to telcos - dumb! danny ayers has an interesting take on all this in his piece "Does the Internet really need the US?" Technorati Tags: politics, internet, future