Unanswered questions in net neutrality debate
In the war of words over net neutrality, there are some questions from both sides of the debate that have been left unanswered.
Opponents of new rules say there simply aren't enough examples of harm to warrant more regulation. Are a few bad apples enough to justify new rules? And doesn't the booming growth of the Web show that things may be just fine as is?
Proponents of the new rules say those bad apples show the next big thing being cooked up in a garage somewhere may never see the light of day if blocked by an Internet service provider. And what are specific examples of services that would be harmed under the rules proposed by FCC Chairmam Julius Genachowski?
What do you think? Let's hear it.
I'll feature some comments later in the day.
October 20, 2009; 8:00 AM ET
Save & Share: Previous: Vint Cerf, early Web technologists show support for net neutrality
Next: FCC tweaking controversial net neutrality proposal ahead of meeting
Posted by: reviewthendo | October 21, 2009 12:25 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: christianm1973 | October 21, 2009 10:38 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: cprachar | October 21, 2009 4:06 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: VirginiaGal2 | October 21, 2009 8:09 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: squirma | October 22, 2009 12:49 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: VirginiaGal2 | October 22, 2009 4:38 PM | Report abuse
The comments to this entry are closed.