CTIA: Net Neutrality Not Good for Anyone

May 17, 2010 -

The wireless industry's lobbyists are keen to influence policy makers in Washington on a number of key issues - most notably net neutrality. CTIA, which represents the country's biggest wireless carriers, is the organization flexing its muscle with the help of front man, former Oklahoma congressman and Hall of Fame NFL wide receiver, Steve Largent.

In an interview with C|Net, Steve Largent, along with Chris Guttman-McCabe, talked about how the members of its group feel about net neutrality. Of course, no one will be surprised on how they feel about: they think it's a bad idea. When asked why wireless be treated differently than any other kind of broadband service, Guttman-McCabe and Largent responded with the following:

Guttman-McCabe: Not necessarily. There have always been instances in communications regulation where services are regulated differently. If you look at wireline and wireless networks, they are regulated differently. Satellite is regulated differently. Cable is treated different from broadcast TV and the list goes on.

Largent: The real difference is that wireless has spectrum constraints. So it must be treated differently. I mean you look at the usage of wireless service and smartphones and there are already constraints in some markets like New York City and San Francisco. There have already been a lot of complaints in those places.

When asked about what his group has been hearing from the FCC on plans to reclassify wireless alongside broadband internet, Largent said that he has been "getting mixed signals" but expects that it will in fact be reclassified and subject to the net neutrality regulations.

Finally, Largent said that Net Neutrality is not good for anyone:

Largent: We don't think Net neutrality regulations should apply to anybody. And we definitely don't think they should apply to the wireless industry. So we're working to educate the commission about that.

You can read the full interview on C|Net.

Posted in

Comments

Re: CTIA: Net Neutrality Not Good for Anyone

The last group our governments should be allowing to get away with this are the wireless groups. They have destroyed competition and consumer confidence in the industry COMPLETELY. Very few other industries have so successfully made themselves hated as wireless, and it's not even a uniquely American endeavour... look at Canada's wireless market for an example of how NOT to do things. 3 year contracts? Some of the highest prices IN THE WORLD? For a country that used to be a leader in digital technologies, this is pretty embarrassing.

Re: CTIA: Net Neutrality Not Good for Anyone

Lobbying and poor regulation will destroy any country....


Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! CP/IP laws should not effect the daily life of common people! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/

Re: CTIA: Net Neutrality Not Good for Anyone

Pretty much they should make it illegal to chrge for texting, they should be forced to treat time as data and vice versa. 50$ a month gets to 10GB of bandwidth, 25 gets you 5GB.


Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! CP/IP laws should not effect the daily life of common people! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/

Re: CTIA: Net Neutrality Not Good for Anyone

Net Neutrality should be enforced for all delivery methods. However, some should be more regulated than other. Because of the shenanigans they are famous for, the wireless industry should be looked at with a more severe eye than the wired delivery. Already the wireless industry engages in predatory pricing for wireless data services.

Text messaging is a perfect example. They charge an obscene amount of money to send a string that fits into 1 single TCP packet. 1. To people without a plan, it's literally a nickel or dime for the most trivial of network transmissions.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Who's responsible for crappy Netflix performance on Verizon?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MaskedPixelanteThis whole Twitch thing just reeks of Google saying "You thought you could get away from us and our policies. That's adorable."07/25/2014 - 2:52pm
Sleaker@james_fudge - hopefully that's the case, but I wont hold my breath for it to happen.07/25/2014 - 1:08pm
SleakerUpdate on crytek situation is a bit ambiguous, but I'm glad they finally said something: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2014-07-25-crytek-addresses-financial-situation07/25/2014 - 1:07pm
E. Zachary KnightMan Atlas, Why do you not want me to have any money? Why? http://www.atlus.com/tears2/07/25/2014 - 12:06pm
Matthew WilsonI agree with that07/25/2014 - 10:45am
james_fudgeI think Twitch will have more of an impact on how YouTube/Google Plus work than the other way around.07/25/2014 - 10:22am
IanCWelp, twitch is going to suck now. Thanks google.07/25/2014 - 6:30am
Sleaker@MP - Looked up hitbox, thanks.07/24/2014 - 9:40pm
Matthew WilsonI agree, but to me given other known alternatives google seems to the the best option.07/24/2014 - 6:30pm
Andrew EisenTo be clear, I have no problem with Google buying it, I'm just concerned it will make a slew of objectively, quantifiably bad changes to Twitch just as it's done with YouTube over the years.07/24/2014 - 6:28pm
Matthew WilsonI doubt yahoo has the resources to pull it off, and I not just talking about money.07/24/2014 - 6:15pm
SleakerI wouldn't have minded a Yahoo purchase, probably would have been a better deal than Tumblr seeing as they paid the same for it...07/24/2014 - 6:13pm
MaskedPixelanteIt's the golden age of Hitbox, I guess.07/24/2014 - 6:08pm
Matthew Wilsonagain twitch was going to get bought. It was just who was going to buy it . Twitch was not even being able to handle the demand, so hey needed a company with allot of infrastructure to help them. I can understand why you would not want Google to buy it .07/24/2014 - 5:49pm
Andrew Eisen"Google is better than MS or Amazon" Wow. Google, as I mentioned earlier, progressively makes almost everything worse and yet there are still two lesser options. Again, wow!07/24/2014 - 5:43pm
Andrew EisenI don't know. MS, in my experience, is about 50/50 on its products. It's either fine or it's unusable crap. Amazon, well... I've never had a problem buying anything from them but I don't use any of their products or services so I couldn't really say.07/24/2014 - 5:42pm
Matthew WilsonGoogle is better than MS or Amazon.07/24/2014 - 5:33pm
Sleaker@AE - I've never seen youtube as a great portal to interact with people from a comment perspective. like ever. The whole interface doesn't really promote that.07/24/2014 - 5:28pm
Andrew EisenNor I. From a content producer's perspective, almost every change Google implements makes the service more cumbersome to use. It's why I set up a Facebook fan page in the first place; it was becoming too difficult to connect with my viewers on YouTube.07/24/2014 - 4:50pm
Sleakerwonder if anyone is going to try and compete with google, I'm not a huge fan of the way they manage their video services.07/24/2014 - 4:41pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician