<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Net Neutrality Rules Could Exempt Google</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thepowerofa.org/2009/10/net-neutrality-rules-could-exempt-google/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thepowerofa.org/2009/10/net-neutrality-rules-could-exempt-google/</link>
	<description>Each day, associations create positive change in America and the world.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 30 May 2010 13:27:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill</title>
		<link>http://www.thepowerofa.org/2009/10/net-neutrality-rules-could-exempt-google/#comment-60</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 16:58:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thepowerofa.org/?p=1064#comment-60</guid>
		<description>To describe Google as &quot;exempt&quot; is silly and misses the point of net neutrality.

The point of NN is to prevent those with a monopoly or duopoly on last mile service to the home or small business from determining (or even influencing) which sites you visit or which apps you use.

Anybody past the last mile--whether Google or Skype or Akamai--is actually subject to competition. Today&#039;s sector monopolies online can become tomorrow&#039;s roadkill.

When Friendster failed to invest adequately in its infrastructure, MySpace and Facebook ate their lunch. If Google sits on their market lead, they&#039;re toast. But Verizon and Comcast have sat on their market positions while the international community rockets past us in broadband uptake.

What we really need is mandatory interconnection with other internet service providers. See this awesome Berkman report for more on why: http://www.fcc.gov/stage/pdf/Berkman_Center_Broadband_Study_13Oct09.pdf

If we can&#039;t have that, we need net neutrality so that we have an effective mandatory interconnection with the end user&#039;s chosen content and applications.

See my reasoning here:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=902071</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To describe Google as &#8220;exempt&#8221; is silly and misses the point of net neutrality.</p>
<p>The point of NN is to prevent those with a monopoly or duopoly on last mile service to the home or small business from determining (or even influencing) which sites you visit or which apps you use.</p>
<p>Anybody past the last mile&#8211;whether Google or Skype or Akamai&#8211;is actually subject to competition. Today&#8217;s sector monopolies online can become tomorrow&#8217;s roadkill.</p>
<p>When Friendster failed to invest adequately in its infrastructure, MySpace and Facebook ate their lunch. If Google sits on their market lead, they&#8217;re toast. But Verizon and Comcast have sat on their market positions while the international community rockets past us in broadband uptake.</p>
<p>What we really need is mandatory interconnection with other internet service providers. See this awesome Berkman report for more on why: <a href="http://www.fcc.gov/stage/pdf/Berkman_Center_Broadband_Study_13Oct09.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.fcc.gov/stage/pdf/Berkman_Center_Broadband_Study_13Oct09.pdf</a></p>
<p>If we can&#8217;t have that, we need net neutrality so that we have an effective mandatory interconnection with the end user&#8217;s chosen content and applications.</p>
<p>See my reasoning here:</p>
<p><a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=902071" rel="nofollow">http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=902071</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
