graeme_p - 7:07 pm on Aug 10, 2010 (gmt 0)
The Huff Post piece hugely exaggerates. For example:
The deal would let ISPs like Verizon -- instead of Internet users like you -- decide which applications deserve the best quality of service.
Whereas the proposal says:
Non-Discrimination Requirement: In providing broadband Internet access service, a provider would be prohibited from engaging in undue discrimination against any lawful Internet content,application, or service in a manner that causes meaningful harm to competition or to users. Prioritization of Internet traffic would be presumed inconsistent with the non-discrimination standard, but the presumption could be rebutted.
The wireless exemption is bad, but as the OP-Ed by the two CEOs in today's Washington points out, some 4G networks are required to be open anyway (I.e. some wireless networks will not be network neutral, some will be). The exemption is also supposed to be reviewed and eventually withdrawn.
The other thing that everyone who criticises this deal is missing, is that right now ISPs can do whatever they want, block what they want, prioritise what they want.