net neutrality and coping with new ideas

Netflix Could Be Forced To Pay Additional Fees In Canada (But Maybe They Should?). CrunchGear gets to the crux of the issue. Just what is Netflix, anyway?

Traditional media companies in Canada pay a fee that, in effect, subsidizes the production of local, Canadian content.

Netflix, despite being a “broadcaster,” albeit a new type of broadcaster, doesn’t have to pay this fee. And because it doesn’t have to pay this fee it can charge less for its services

Then again, Netflix didn’t have to pay to lay down the broadband infrastructure in the first place. You could say it’s merely piggy-backing off the work of others.

Net neutrality is not so much about being neutral to I’net traffic but rather about who pays and who controls. Up until the popularity of video, such as Netflix provides, there has been something close to a balance between providers and consumers on the network as far as traffic goes. That is why the various parties providing network transport and other services often worked with each other in peering arrangements depending upon their end users for their income.

On demand video has tipped the balance and the entities involved in moving that traffic are struggling to develop new arrangements to get costs, fees, and capabilities back in balance. Meanwhile, the government is starting to take note that video providers – and, by extension, other I’net services – are something like the broadcast media they have been playing with for years. That is behind the Amazon vs Texas in regards to sales taxes brouhaha in recent news. It shows here in municipal production fees and efforts to promote local identities in a storm of big media.

The paradigm is changing. The net neutrality position tries to put a lid on that change, That needs thought.

Comments are closed.