Comments on: BellSouth to Internet: Show Me The Money

By: Neutralidad 101: El Fin de la Telecomunicación Tradicional | Web Professionals Group of Puerto Rico

Wed, 03 Jun 2009 23:23:10 +0000

[...] una de las grandes compañías telefónicas y de acceso a Internet en Estados Unidos, anunció su intención de comenzar a cobrarle una prima a proveedores de contenido de banda ancha como Yahoo o l…. Aquí vemos a Bellsouth en su típica mentalidad de compañía telefónica. Literalmente están [...]

By: GuerrillaPop » Blog Archive » El Fin de la Telecomunicación Tradicional

Thu, 17 Jan 2008 17:10:22 +0000

By: oDBFabsdS4

oDBFabsdS4 — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 09:50:05 +0000

f5dd6us3q0rB ifQX3yUV9Vc epF3R6qW2Huw

By: Invisible Yet Necessary » Network neutrality and the state of broadband

Invisible Yet Necessary » Network neutrality and the state of broadband — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 18:19:27 +0000

[...] Bill Smith, the CTO of Bellsouth said something similar 2 weeks ago Higher usage for broadband services drives more costs that we have to recover (via OM Malik) [...]

By: Digitaler Film » Blog Archive » Warner will deutsches Filmdownload-Angebot starten.

Mon, 30 Jan 2006 20:01:42 +0000

[...] Man kann gespannt sein ob die Konsumenten das Angebot akzeptieren und ihre Bandbreite für einen kommerziellen Filmhandel öffnen. Denn gerade die Bandbreite ist, neben den Serverkosten, der größte Kostenpunkt bei Filmdownloads. Diese Kosten verdeckt an die Konsumenten weiterzugeben ist natürlich schlau. Allerdings müsste dann bei den Preisen ein Vorteil für die Konsumenten entsehen, denn wer kauft sich einen Filmdownload zu einem Preis für den man sich auch die DVD ins Regal stellen kann, zumal noch nichteinmal klar ist ob der Filmdownload eine entsprechende Wertigkeit aufweist (kein Brennen der Filme). Interessant wird ob die Zugangsprovider (Telekom, AOL und Arcor) zuschauen werden wie über ihre Flatrates von dritten Geld verdient wird. Dabei ist Prisant, dass über das In2Movies Konzept der ganze Traffic bei den Endkunden liegt und dadurch vor allem die Leitungen und Kalkulationen der Internetprovider belastet werden. In Amerika gibt es bereits Stimmen, die eine Beteiligung der Provider an den Contenteinnahmen fordern: Higher usage for broadband services drives more costs that we have to recover. Und was macht eigentlich die die Konkurrenz? Mal sehen ob hier gerade das “Phonoline” der Filmindustrie an den Start geht. [...]

By: Technology Evangelist

Technology Evangelist — Mon, 30 Jan 2006 05:18:28 +0000

How Yahoo Could Beat Google at Search: Prioritized Bandwidth

Under this scenario, a company like Yahoo could pay for prioritized bandwidth, causing their site's content to be delivered faster than Google's. Communications companies, including AT&T, Verizon, and BellSouth see prioritized bandwidth as a way ...

By: Mull

Mull — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:30:22 +0000

If you are driving a Prius it might not be a good idea to play chicken with a Mack Truck.

By: Mo

Mo — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 18:39:50 +0000

I am sorry but I think network neutrality is a tempest in a teapot. I find it hard to believe that whatever goodwill among customers Apple has created, they would destroy it by increasing prices. I would like to think that the major content providers are smarter than that.

By: Jim Whiteley

Jim Whiteley — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 16:44:13 +0000

This dumb idea will continue to emerge until all the “Bell Heads” in telecom management are retired. They should stop trying to tier service and make the service they are providing work. Why do providers try to get into new services rather than make their existing service the best? It is just another dumb idea from a dumb pipe provider run by a “Bell Head”. Everybody just say “NO” and they will go back home.

By: rick

rick — Thu, 19 Jan 2006 22:57:39 +0000

This multi-tier thing could be good. If the differentiator of added cost/fees is volume, then voice traffic should be safe. Keep it free Skype, Gizmo, MS, Google, Yahoo...

Or will they somehow get to that sacred cow of the Bells business.

By: Fazal Majid

Fazal Majid — Thu, 19 Jan 2006 09:21:52 +0000

Rent-seeking is as good a litmus test of a monopoly as any. Given how much money the Bells spend on lobbying, it’s not surprising they think they can get away with anything.

By: Ajay

Ajay — Thu, 19 Jan 2006 00:40:04 +0000

I don’t understand the statements of the telco executives. Don’t Yahoo and the other content providers pay for bandwidth right now, whether through their hosting provider or peering arrangements? If the telcos are not making enough money that way, let them raise prices across the board. On the other hand, if they want to have tiers of service, that makes sense also. But none of this has anything to do with content providers getting a free lunch. I don’t see how anybody can justify THAT statement.

By: AM

AM — Wed, 18 Jan 2006 23:58:26 +0000

It should also be noted that the ISPs themselves, such as SBC & Comcast, have been advertising their services with promises of faster downloads and access to all of this bandwidth consuming content. So the plan seems to be to lure in consumers with promises of faster access to content and then charge content providers a fee for delivering this access to the consumer. They used the content to get the customer and now they want to charge the content providers (and/or the consumer directly) for accessing the content? That's such BS.

Further, it may not apply for Cable, but DSL guarantees a minimum connection speed at whatever pricing tier you elect, e.g. for $29.99/mo you get a minimum of 512Kbps, you get 768Kbps for $39.99/mo, or you get 1.5Mbs for $49.99/mo.

By: Om Malik on Broadband : » Google: No Paying The Net Fathers

Om Malik on Broadband : » Google: No Paying The Net Fathers — Wed, 18 Jan 2006 23:22:35 +0000

[...] Google, despite all the posturing by the Regional Bell Companies is in no mood to play ball, and is ready to duke it out in the public domain. In other words, they are calling Bells’ Bluff. Jeff Pulver had made this suggestion only yesterday. In a quick email to Networking Pipeline, company spokesman Barry Schnitt writes: Google is not discussing sharing of the costs of broadband networks with any carrier. We believe consumers are already paying to support broadband access to the Internet through subscription fees and, as a result, consumers should have the freedom to use this connection without limitations. [...]

By: Raphael

Raphael — Wed, 18 Jan 2006 21:08:17 +0000

Aside from old cronies in the tech world and the Mavs/HDTV, does Cuban have any skin in this game?

By: Amit

Amit — Wed, 18 Jan 2006 19:57:39 +0000

So, if BLS wants to charge the ASPs for premium access to the network, what are they prepared to do to show that they’re actually providing the enhanced service. i.e SLAs based on packet delivery, latency, etc? QoS may not be so important for the Apple’s of the world (so the song takes another 5 secs to download), but perhaps more important to the Vonage’s of the world.