[178465] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Fri Feb 27 17:22:25 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <54F0958F.7070105@meetinghouse.net>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 13:58:05 -0800
To: Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
> On Feb 27, 2015, at 08:04 , Miles Fidelman =
<mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> wrote:
>=20
> I'd think they'd be better off with some jujitsu, along the lines of:
>=20
> "We've always practiced network neutrality, not like some of our =
competitors, this won't effect us at all and may enforce some good =
business practices on others=E2=80=9D
I think they=E2=80=99d be pretty hard pressed to say this with a =
straight face. Even if they could, anyone who is paying attention would =
know better.
> (As far as I can tell, Verizon has not played games with favoring =
their own content - for all intents and purposes, they operate FIOS as a =
common carrier - no funny throttling, no usage caps, etc.)
Verizon has been every bit as much involved in the let=E2=80=99s tax the =
big content providers for all we can games as any of the other eyeball =
providers.
> I'm surprised they weren't a bit more vocal on the OTHER FCC decision =
of the day - preempting some state restrictions on municipal broadband =
builds - Verizon has been very active in pushing state laws to kill muni =
networks (even in places where they have no intention of building out).
They prefer to do this in ways the public is less likely to notice what =
they are doing. The last thing they want is a big public backlash =
against their backroom dealings with lawmakers on this matter. The fact =
that the president called them out on it publicly is pretty much game =
over for that tactic anyway.
Owen
>=20
> Miles Fidelman
>=20
> Scott Fisher wrote:
>> I am not arguing that they have a valid complaint. I just think their
>> method of doing so is a bit childish. It does get the point across,
>> just not in the method I respect. Just my opinion though.
>>=20
>> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Rob McEwen <rob@invaluement.com> =
wrote:
>>> Scott Fisher,
>>>=20
>>> I think Verizon's statement was brilliant, and entirely appropriate. =
Some
>>> people are going to have a hard time discovering that being in favor =
of
>>> Obama's version of "net neutrality"... will soon be just about as =
cool as
>>> having supported SOPA.
>>>=20
>>> btw - does anyone know if that thick book of regulations, you =
know... those
>>> hundreds of pages we weren't allowed to see before the vote... =
anyone know
>>> if that is available to the public now? If so, where?
>>>=20
>>> Rob McEwen
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Scott Fisher =
<littlefishguy@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Funny, but in my honest opinion, unprofessional. Poor PR.
>>>>=20
>>>> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 9:05 AM, Larry Sheldon =
<larrysheldon@cox.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>=20
>>>>> =
http://publicpolicy.verizon.com/blog/entry/fccs-throwback-thursday-move-im=
poses-1930s-rules-on-the-internet
>>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>=20
>=20
> --=20
> In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
> In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
