Twitter Updates for 2010-11-30

  • The Comcast/Level 3 dispute shows why network policy should be about interconnection, not discrimination. http://on.wsj.com/hautpl #
  • Comcast isn't discriminating (it charges other video distributors the same). This is a classic terminating access monopoly case. #
  • I remember! RT @lessig: A decade before, we were talking about the same issues. "The Policy Implications of E2E": http://bit.ly/gBSCoF #
  • Gotta cut down, man! RT @adamwerbach: According to the EPA, 96% of human exposure to dioxin, a toxic carcinogen, comes from eating meat. #
  • This week is shaping up as a turning point in US Internet policy. Like 2005, when SCt. decided Grokster & Brand X the same day. #
  • @GlennF Wrong question. The peering issue isn't net neutrality; it's whether market forces are failing for interconnection. Seems so. #
  • @GlennF The peering solution may be as simple as transparency and perhaps an arbitration process. Very similar to the TV retrans fight. #