Mediageek has a “great post”:1 questioning FCC Chair Kevin Martin’s support for “tiering”:
bq. Martin also expressed support for “tiering” broadband packages, allowing providers to charge more for richer content. Yet it doesn’t seem clear to me whether Martin is just supporting the idea that a consumer would pay more to get a 10 megabit connection than for a 2 megabit connection, or if he actually supports the ability of AT&T to charge content providers in order to reach households via their internet connections. He might even support the ability for an ISP to charge consumers a higher price to receive internet content from providers that haven’t struck a deal with that ISP. It’s simply not clear.
bq. There’s a crucial difference between these interpretations of “tiering” and because this word is being thrown around so much it’s often difficult to know who’s supporting what.
I, for one, would like Martin to be crystal clear on this subject, since his interpretation of “tiering” is critical to the Net Neutrality debate.
[1]http://www.mediageek.net/?p=1370
Filed under: Network Neutrality, Policy
