Open Media?

[D. Hugh Redelmeier]

| From: CLIFFORD ILKAY <clifford_ilkay-biY6FKoJMRdBDgjK7y7TUQ at public.gmane.org>
| 
| I would be happy to pay UBB if and only if I had real choice for Internet
| connectivity. As long as two media companies masquerading as ISPs continue to
| have a choke hold on the "last mile", we will not have any choice and they
| will succeed in ruining Internet access just like they've ruined mobile phone
| "service" in this country.

Good point.

I don't mind paying something related to the cost of providing
service.  This is a "comodity" pricing model.  True competition drives
prices down to the cost of providing them.

I don't like "value" pricing model, the one monopolies want to charge.
In other words, monopolies want to squeeze the customers to pay as
much as they are willing, which is based on the value of the service
to the customer.

Usage based billing could be based on either model.  Clearly, we are
in a monopoly regime and we are not headed out of it.

And another thing:

The cost of the last mile is not at all related to traffic.  So UBB
should not apply.

The backhaul costs (from last mile to third party ISP connection
point) are pretty low.  So UBB should be really low.

The cost from the ISP to the cloud turns out not to be very expensive
(but more than the backhaul costs) so modest UBB would make sense.

Note: Bell should not get very much UBB for third-party ISP customers.
They could charge their own retail customers more.  But competition should
keep that in check.

| We need to have dark fiber optic cable to the node
| provided by a public utility and then we'll have a choice from many providers
| who will be happy to sell IP and bandwidth at much more reasonable prices.

That is the only way I see out of the monopoly regime.  And it doesn't
look too likely.
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists