Netflix and net neutrality

Just reading this on the BBC.

Netflix are complaining that ISPs are making them pay for net neutrality.

What I can't see is if the ISP by default is actively slowing their traffic or if it is being degraded because of it having to contend on an equal basis with other traffic.

If it is because of contention then what Netflix is actually doing is paying for their traffic to have special priority essentially lowering the priority of other traffic. In that case it isn't they are having to pay so that they can get net neutrality but they are paying so that they actually stop net neutrality (they are big enough to afford it and because their traffic is high priority it will negatively impact the small innovators they are saying should be supported).

Its hard for isps. People want cheap broadband but are using more and more bandwidth. Something has to give

I don't blame the ISP in this. If they are treating all traffic equally then every "supplier" takes their chances. But, Netflix don't want to be treated equally - but want to still say they support net neutrality. They can't have it both ways.

And anyway, since when has there ever been net neutrality. The amount of connectivity a supplier can hook up is dependent on the depth of their pockets. Netflix can afford multiple gigabit+ pipes to connect and peer with the Internet. Smaller companies can't - therefore net neutrality has never existed and never will.

Seens net neutrality is a big issue in the USA than over here where we have over the years been use to throttling and restrictions on certain types of data

Edited by bobble_bob (Fri 21-Mar-14 16:01:28)

In the case of Comcast they were intentionally running Netflix over congested transit. They've made Netflix pay to peer with them.

The difference in the US is the market -- most consumers have very limited choice for broadband connectivity, generally at most a choice between one DSL provider and maybe one cable provider. With little competition inevitably the consumer loses out.

In the UK, lots of competition, so if your ISP delivers poor Netflix performance you swap to one that performs better, i.e. the one providing the best connectivity (to Netflix) wins. In the US, the consumer suffers until Netflix pay the ransom.

hmm, if a person only watches netflix does that mean they risk their connection buffering more now there is no net neutrality? i.e. if netflix didnt pay up.

Also isn't this setting a precedent for isp's to dictate what the end user can and cannot watch?

ISP's need to be very careful of this path as by manipulating traffic it means they risk endorsing traffic they allow through unhindered.

Which is why Netflix are unhappy.

I posted on this subject here:

http://forums.thinkbroadband.com/park/f/4309502-usa-...

But it seemed no one was interested

I think the important thing to look at here is what the money Netflix has paid is being used for.

If the ISPs are using all of it to invest in infrastructure, then fair enough. But if it's just sitting in Comcast's (et al.) accounts, then the ISPs' actions are deplorable.