"There is a lot of talk coming from CitiGroup about how Dodd-Frank isn't perfect, So let me say this to anyone listening at Citi —I agree with you. Dodd-Frank isn't perfect. It should have broken you into pieces." -- Elizabeth Warren
Something of the sort may be necessary in some areas.
As there is not complete and total competition among ISP's...
For example, in my current location, we had the following options for ISP a couple years ago...
Our (then) current dial-up ISP, the only provider in the area.
Satellite connection (a few ISP's, I think, but never seriously checked into it, as due to the limitations of the system, was not very interested.)
DSL - Not available, outside DSL hub range.
Cable - Not available, as no cable line to the building - after many phone calls and mostly as a direct result of new residence construction next door, cable line installed, allowing current service from Comcast, which leads to my point.
Comcast is the only cable provider available in the area.
Edit: That said, I think laws enforcing "net neutrality" could be far to easily abused, so...
Instead, I would rather efforts to promote more competing ISPs in all areas would be better.
Of course, a few protections for free speech via the internetz might be necessary.
But if you take them too far, infringement on other rights might occur.
Last edited by The Mark; 07-26-10 at 07:10 PM.
Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller
So much for free market meaning an extension of individual liberty.. that is a flat out lie. In this case it is clearly a reduction of liberty and an extension of corporate liberty. One doesn’t have to wonder why DC is full of corporate cronies when you consider they run your government and libertarian fiscal policy is their dominate priority.