Stuck in "Neutrality"

Posted at 12:37 PM ET, 12/ 6/2010
FCC net neutrality proposal opens door for prioritization and higher fees for consumers
By Cecilia Kang

[For our collective edification:
neu·tral·i·ty
   /nuˈtrælɪti, nyu-/ Show Spelled[noo-tral-i-tee, nyoo-] Show IPA
–noun
1. the state of being neutral.
2. the policy or status of a nation that does not participate in a war between other nations: the continuous neutrality of Switzerland.
3. neutral status, as of a seaport during a war.

Ho hum. That doesn't answer any questions.

If "neutral" isn't the least meaningful word in the English language, then something about that's really not very nice.

And really, how can something have a definition where it is only defined by itself? Is neutral nothingness?

neu·tral
   /ˈnutrəl, ˈnyu-/ Show Spelled[noo-truhl, nyoo-] Show IPA
–adjective
1. not taking part or giving assistance in a dispute or war between others: a neutral nation during World War II.
2. not aligned with or supporting any side or position in a controversy: The arbitrator was absolutely neutral.
3. of or belonging to a neutral state or party: neutral territory.
4. of no particular kind, characteristics, etc.; indefinite: a neutral personality that made no impression whatever; a sex-neutral job title.
5. (of a color or shade)
a. gray; without hue; of zero chroma; achromatic.
b. matching well with many or most other colors or shades, as white or beige.
6. Botany, Zoology . neuter.
7. not causing or reflecting a change in something: It is believed that the new tax law will be revenue neutral.
8. Chemistry . exhibiting neither acid nor alkaline qualities: neutral salts.
9. Physics .
a. (of a particle) having no charge.
b. (of an atom, molecule, collection of particles, fluid, or solid) having no net charge; electroneutral; not electrified.
c. not magnetized.
10. Phonetics . (of a vowel) pronounced with the tongue relaxed in a central position, as the a in alive; reduced.
–noun
11. a person or a nation that remains neutral, as in a controversy or war.
12. a citizen of a neutral nation during a war.
13. Machinery, Automotive . the position or state of disengaged gears or other interconnecting parts: in neutral.
14. a neutral color.]


A proposed net neutrality regulation at the Federal Communications Commission would allow broadband service providers to prioritize their own content and that of partners over that of competitors. The draft proposal also would allow broadband network operators to charge consumers based on how much data they use, according to one source at the FCC who has seen the draft of rules.

What that means is that a company such as Comcast could make its soon-to-be acquired library of NBC content cheaper to watch and delivered at better quality than streaming videos from competitors like Netflix, the source and experts said. Add the permission of usage based pricing, which the source said Comcast insisted on in meetings with the FCC chairman’s staff, and you could see a scenario where users would be less inclined to subscribe to Netflix because they would meet their usage caps and end up spending more money for competing services.

“This allows for fast and slow lanes and while it suggests it would be a negative thing, nowhere does it say it violates the principle of rules,” the sources said on the condition of anonymity because the document hasn’t been made public.

The source said the FCC would require network operators disclose how they are managing services that allow for prioritization of certain content. But for enforcement purposes, carriers don’t have to prove it is reasonable so there is less burden on the carrier.

“If you are Netflix and suddenly it costs subscribers $60 a month to use the service, then this hits you directly,” said Art Brodsky, communications director at Public Knowledge. “Usage pricing is an excuse for not building out your network and the question is how to enforce this and whether a company like Comcast had set usage prices for YouTube but not Comcast content.”

The rules are weaker on wireless. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski’s proposal would prevent wireless carriers such as AT&T and Verizon Wireless from blocking competing voice and video telephony services (think Skype video or Apple Face Time). But observers say that by clearly drawing rules only on those two areas, the agency has opened the possibility for carriers to block all other applications.


By Cecilia Kang | December 6, 2010; 12:37 PM ET


[
#
#
#

*
Anne-Taylor Adams not really neutral, is it?
about an hour ago · LikeUnlike
*
PH Elefante
it doesn't appear to be, but paying for data usage is more equitable...problem is...there's no way an individual can afford the bandwidth they're likely to need. and i don't mean just for watching internet tv.
how much more do i get to charg...e as a freelance designer to account for the bandwidth needed to run a virtual office space?
because the dollar-a-day i'm paying now is in NO WAY a fair price for the shitty service i get. if i could guarantee a reliable connection, i'd happily pay more!
...
the tragedy, of course, is that this heads us further away from internet-as-basic-utility (like electric or gas or water), and towards a luxury good. no amount of subsidizing - the FCC's traditionally fallacious way of resolving market-generated inequalities - is going to build the infrastructure we need in an information economy.See More
2 seconds ago · Like
#
#
#
]