(November 12, 2014 at 10:09 pm)KUSA Wrote: So why is it not fair to charge the biggest consumer more money?

Netflix isn't a consumer, Comcast's customers are - and their customers do pay for the bandwidth. Netflix is a peer.

Comcast could add the necessary bandwidth at no cost - their upstream provider has offered to install the necessary hardware, and the uplink is literally a cross-connect between cabinets in the same data center.

Comcast wants the ability to double-dip - charging both end-users.

(November 12, 2014 at 10:20 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:

(November 12, 2014 at 10:09 pm)KUSA Wrote: So why is it not fair to charge the biggest consumer more money?

Netflix isn't a consumer, Comcast's customers are - and their customers do pay for the bandwidth. Netflix is a peer.

Comcast could add the necessary bandwidth at no cost - their upstream provider has offered to install the necessary hardware, and the uplink is literally a cross-connect between cabinets in the same data center.

Comcast wants the ability to double-dip - charging both end-users.

What if Netflix wants to pay Comcast to prioritize its data so that it delivers a better product? Under net neutrality...Comcast and Netflix could not come to such an arrangement. Minimalist could suck up all the bandwith on his block downloading horse porn and Netflix can't do anything about it.....or the reverse is true. Netflix users could suck up all the bandwith and leave Minimalist with blue balls.