Hacker News Reader

Comment by jrs235 | Hacker News Reader

The ISPs (with their local market monopolies) are also content providers. How is them using their network/distribution monopoly to gain an unfair advantage for their content distribution different from Microsoft using their OS to gain an unfair advantage for their browser in the 90's? Isn't NN about constraining unfair competition practices?

View on HN

That is FTC not FCC.

Fair enough. If the ISPs don't what to be liable for the content that traverses their network then they ought to be neutral to content and not prioritize traffic based on it's content (or source, destination, protocol, etc). But if they are inspecting the packets then they should have some liability for what they are delivering and the content on their network. The ISPs want it both ways like someone else mentioned, the want to control what people see but not be liable (responsible).

How about they don't inspect any content, but I download the media player provided by my ISP and it doesn't contribute to my data cap, but netflix does?

I would think if they have data caps then they will have to determine how much data their own content consumes and count it against the data cap. Otherwise this is abusing their network monopoly to support and provide an unfair advantage to their content business.

In the United States there are often deals where certain services used on certain networks do not count against mobile data caps. For example, DirectTV Now app does not count against an AT&T datacap.

> That is FTC not FCC.

It's the FTC in the case of Microsoft because Microsoft isn't a carrier. Regulating communications carriers is the FCC's entire purpose.

That is correct and I should not have conflated the two. Personal opinion, media should be moved to FTC in the context of internet.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com