Skip to main content

View Diary: Welcome to the world of non-net neutrality (78 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  My compromise (0+ / 0-)

    First off, Vonage isn't using it for free. The customers are paying for it. I don't know about you, but I pay for my Internet access.

    I think that having Shaw customers have to sign up for the enhanced network and pay the same amount as Vonage users is fair, even if Shaw provided their VoIP service for less money. $15/month for Shaw VoIP. $10/month for enhanced VoIP service. Give the customer a choice.

    You may not mind a corporation making you pay more because you want to send your bits through someone else's service, but I do.

    People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people

    by The Icelander on Tue Jun 20, 2006 at 10:38:40 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Paying is the point. (0+ / 0-)

      Read my post.  If you want the enahnced services you end up paying for them either way.  Why do you object to Shaw giving its customers a package deal if they use BOTH their high-speed services AND their VoIP solutions?  That is, in effect, all that Shaw is doing.  Its purely a pricing/packaging deal.

      First off, Vonage isn't using it for free. The customers are paying for it. I don't know about you, but I pay for my Internet access.

      This doesn't even make sense.  First you claim that Vonage isn't using it for free and THEN point out that the customers are the ones paying.  When exactly is Vonage paying for anything?

      We all pay for our internet access.  My provider has several grades of service for different prices.  I buy the premium service while many people only buy the basic service.  You don't hear me complaining about not getting the premium features at the same price as the basic service users.  I am getting something extra and I am paying for the priviledge.

      Shaw's case is no different.  The existing (i.e. pre-enhanced QoS) services are still there and operating as they have been.  Vonage users are getting the exact same handling as they always have for the same price.

      Shaw decided to upgrade their VoIP services to provide a better grade of service by implementing a separate managed network which supports the IP QoS protocols.  They reconfigured their network so that users of their VoIP services have THOSE packets routed over the new network.  Presumably other non-Shaw VoIP packets are still using the same existing facilities that they always have been.  This would include the Vonage packets.

      Shaw has not "degraded" the Vonage service in any way relative to what it was previously.  What they HAVE done is created a new network which can provide ENHANCED service to VoIP customers who have access to it.

      Shaw has apparantly decided to essentially give access to the new ENHANCED facilities to its VoIP customers for "free".  Something that they are perfectly within their rights to do, and something that for all intents and purposes amounts to them giving their customers a price break if they agree to pay for two services (high-speed access and VoIP) instead of one.  This is a common and accepted business practice.

      Now, what about all those poor Vonage customers?  They have not been harmed.  They still get the same exact QoS that they have always had and for the same price.  Their Vonage service works with the same quality as it did before the ENHANCED services became available.

      So, now the question comes down to whether Shaw (who is footing the extra expense to support this ENHANCED network) should be required to route Vonage packets over this NEW service for no additional money.  It drives up the bandwidth required and, therefore, the expense of providing the service but who is paying for that additional expense?

      I don't have any problem with Shaw saying look, if you want to continue to use Vonage instead of our VoIP offering, that's fine.  We'll even give you a choice.  You can continue to use Vonage and the pre-existing infrastructure as you have been all along and no extra money is required.  OR, if you want to reap the benefits of better QoS WITH Vonage that is fine too, but you are going to have to pay $10/month to cover your part of the expense of maintaining that enhanced service.

      Vonage is essentially a non-entity in all of this.  Shaw is simply saying that they now have a "VoIP QoS Enhancement Feature" that costs $10/month AND as an added bonus if you choose to use THEIR VoIP services they will wave the $10/Month fee.  What's wrong with that?

    •  One more thing. (0+ / 0-)

      You may not mind a corporation making you pay more because you want to send your bits through someone else's service, but I do.

      If I understand what you are saying here I think you have it wrong.

      Shaw is NOT charging them more money to send their packets through Vonage.  They can continue to send their packets to Vonage as they have been doing all along.  However, IF the Vonage customers want their packets to go to Vonage THROUGH the new enhanced facilities to obtain better quality phone calls THEN they will have to pay for the priviledge of having access to the NEW facilities.

      Vonage is complaining because this gives the Shaw VoIP solution a better quality of service and, therefore, a competitive advantage.  If they don't like that they have a number of choices:

      1. Suck it up and stop whining.
      1. Build their own competing QoS network and compete to put Shaw out of business.
      1. Contract with Shaw to route Vonage packets over the new facilities and pay the $10/month for THEIR customers like Shaw has effectively done for theirs.
      •  Missing the point (0+ / 0-)

        Instead of investing in providing a bigger pipe, or fiber to the home, or anything that would improve service for everybody, Shaw has decided to create a new network so their users, and the users of other services who pay protection money, get enhanced service at the expense of others, whose bits are left on the old network.

        And the idea of having to pay the ISP so your bits don't have to sit at the back of the bus (because, hey, the bus goes to the same place anyway) will stifle innovation. Maybe not for Vonage, but what about the new VoIP companies out there who are doing the really great new stuff. Are they going to have to raise even more venture capital?

        Also, do we want every VoIP company and every IPTV company and every website to have to build their own network or pay exhorbitant fees to every ISP so they can compete with the ISP? Of course not! But that's the world your three solutions take us into. The Internet will change from a commons of ideas to an interactive cable network, something like Prodigy or AOL, where users are returned to their status as consumers, not producers, of information.

        People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people

        by The Icelander on Wed Jun 21, 2006 at 06:13:58 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site