"On Tuesday, the Federal Trade Commission will elbow its way into the biggest feud in cyberspace -- the ongoing dispute between content companies like Google and broadband Internet providers like AT&T over the issue that has been dubbed net neutrality."..more there

ed: I don't have a problem with tiered pricing, if and after those telecoms give up all claims to easements on private property for "their" infrastructure. Let the property go back to the property owners it was taken from, and let them negotiate "free trade" contracts for transit, plus, let them pay back all the tax breaks they got over the years, and everyone who has paid a phone bill will get a nice check back.

Basically, I think they should unbundle "content" from "pipes", just do away with the notion. Same as they should unbundle "cell phones" from "cellular service".  Once you start allowing the bundling, vertical monopolies start forming. We don't let car companies run the gas stations, for precisely that reason, it would be a consumer disaster in short order. We shouldn't let the "infohighway" be any different in that regard, IMO.  When I negotiate for bandwith, I want to know how fast, how much, and what will it cost, and not have to be forced into some bogged down formula plan for this internet channel or that one with a deal on alternate blue tuesdays if I also take this "service" or that. Nuts, sell bandwith, period. If I want "premium" content, I want that to be between myself and the content owners, we no longer need middlemen for that "service". Treat the packets the same, with guaranteed transit, that is the only "neutrality" that can work..

 Cell service the same, how many minutes for how much and who can I call, what is long distance? That should be about it. None of their business what ringtone I might want or if I want this minute to go to web surfing or that minute to go to pure voice calling or what features are "allowed" or not on some piece of hardware I buy..

 I think tying the physical phone to the service is nuts, that's why we have so many bogus locked down crippled phones, and "plans" that change daily and that hardly anyone can really understand, and once we let the bandwith providers into the content game they will find ways to bump up prices and stifle competition until they get a local lock, just like the bad old days, and looking at mergers, that is the way it is headed again. Man, I *so* much remember having 30 seconds to talk to grandma because it cost so much on the rented phone. I thought we did away with that nonsense, but it looks like they want it back, now with all the various content and ways that you can use the lines for..

 Heck, they haven't done what they promised to do in the 90s yet, roll out high speed cheap fiber everywhere. We still have huge geographical areas with nothing resembling any sort of broadband at all, despite them getting billions in breaks and service fees and so on fine print on your bill.

We really don't need the internet to become just another form of cable TV.

Joe google is already paying for their bandwith.

Joe google user is already paying for bandwith.

Now they want a middleman "handling" fee?? And if you don't pay it they want to give you bupkis, or worse? Some outside company comes up with content that people really like, some cool idea, so they see it, figure they can copy the idea, drop down the innovators idea by restricting throughput, offer the same thing as some crappy clone product, and give it priority on "their" infrastructre which the public paid for already?

Nuts. Or maybe I am just getting cranky, but I am way past tired of millionaires crying poverty and zillion buck companies crying poverty.

Mostly because...I don't believe them.

Anyway, more info about the open to the public conference at the FTC website here.