| reply to terrywin
Re: Business 100% correct - I'm agreeing to pay for access to the internet, not the parts of the internet that generate additional revenue for you.
The shipping analogy is complete bunk - to make it applicable you would have to say that I can agree to pay for a certain shipping rate/speed (such as 6 day ground) but if I don't buy the packaging from you or a company that pays you a kick-back, my package will actually take 18 days - it's all spelled out in the mile long Screw the End User Licensing Agreement...
I find it funny how the same monopoly based ISPs that say "oh no, we'd never intentionally limit competitive products on our networks" when talking to congressional committees about updating fair access laws will then turn around and spout off to the media about collecting additional "fees" from competitive providers. Perhaps they're testing the water - I don't know. In the end, using your own market position to limit competition is against the law. However, I think it’s anyone’s guess as to how this would play out in the courts - should it come to that. |
