[kictanet] [ISOC_KE] Fwd: Who should Pay for Netflix?

[Ali Hussein]

That is a compelling argument which in my humble opinion telcos have failed to convince me. In fact I think the argument is now moot as more and more telco are entering into the triple play space. 

I'm however really curious how this issue will pan out since its a mix of regulatory interventions and free market forces. This argument by telcos is forcing players like Google and Facebook to enter the infrastructure space.


Ali Hussein

+254 0770 906375 / 0713 601113

Twitter: @AliHKassim
Skype: abu-jomo
LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim
Blog: www.alyhussein.com

"I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots".  ~ Albert Einstein

Sent from my iPad

> On Mar 24, 2014, at 5:42 AM, McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Mwendwa,
> 
> On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 10:05 PM, Mwendwa Kivuva
> <Kivuva at transworldafrica.com> wrote:
>> The answer seems to lie on the text below. As a consumer, I don't see
>> why I should pay for a service I don't use.
> 
> 
> This is a cleverly crafted, but erroneous argument spun by highly
> profitable telcos who don't want to upgrade their networks to the
> bandwidth levels that we should all enjoy at much lower costs.  Look
> at the places like Singapore or South Korea or even places in the US
> where Google fiber project has rolled out.  ISPs can be profitable at
> much lower price points delivering much higher speeds to consumers.
> They just don't want to do it this way, as they are quite comfortable
> making windfall profits while delivering as little bandwidth as they
> can.
> 
> 
>> 
>>>> When Netflix delivered its movies by mail, the cost of delivery was
>>>> included in the price their customer paid.  It would've been neither right
>>>> nor legal for Netflix to demand a customer's neighbors pay the cost of
>>>> delivering his movie.  Yet that's effectively what Mr. Hastings is
>>>> demanding here, and in rather self-righteous fashion.  Netflix may now be
>>>> using an Internet connection instead of the Postal Service, but the same
>>>> principle applies.  If there's a cost of delivering Mr. Hastings's movies
>>>> at the quality level he desires - and there is - then it should be borne
>>>> by Netflix and recovered in the price of its service.
>> 
>> But that answer negates net-neutrality principles : All internet
>> traffic should be treated equal. It's a tough debate
> 
> It's pretty simple.  I pay my ISP to deliver packets to me.  i pay
> them for an "all you can eat" service.  If I choose to stream movies
> or the ICANN meeting or music or just email, it makes no difference.
> They still should provide me with the service I pay for, simple
> 
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> 
> McTim
> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
> route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20140324/bd5f3b73/attachment.htm>