[2006] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
The "national highway system" analogy is incorrect.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steven Grimm)
Fri Jan 17 13:07:52 1992
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 92 10:03:04 PST
From: Steven.Grimm@Eng.Sun.COM (Steven Grimm)
To: com-priv@psi.com
I've heard the NREN described as a "data superhighway" a number of times,
and heard the backbone compared to the national highway system. It doesn't
seem like a very close analog to me. Yes, both were built with Federal
funds. But if I want to go up to San Francisco today, I don't have to
fill out a form describing why I want to go, then catch a ride with the
exclusive transit contractor, whose vehicles are the only ones allowed on
the road.
The highways are used by commercial traffic every day -- much more so than
by the government. I don't know a single person who objects to paying
for the highway system because it subsidizes businesses by providing cheap
travel. Why is this such a big deal for data networks? A public-funded
network with equal access for all is a benefit to everyone.
To put it more strongly, I think the government is within its rights to
build the network and to hire a company to make sure it stays up and running;
it's an expensive proposition that private industry would be loathe to start
on its own. But government has no business dictating what happens on that
network; it's public property.
