<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>CUSTOMERS already pay for their connection in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r18539518</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Sun, 06 Dec 2009 10:05:54 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Sun, 06 Dec 2009 10:05:54 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: CUSTOMERS already pay for their connection</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18544993</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/461260"><b>deadi</b></A> : Agreed, we already have access to whatever we want. Why spoil it by allowing a seperate network and QOS then charging for it? <br><SMALL>--<br>We learn through the exchange of information, tell me more......</SMALL>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18544993</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 21 Jun 2007 11:15:27 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>CUSTOMERS already pay for their connection</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18539518</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1426384"><b>ColorBASIC</b></A> : Verizon and the other ISPs turning around and charging content providers for the same delivery of content is double-dipping.<br><SMALL>--<br><A HREF="http://www.mugsie.org/">Macintosh Users Group Serving the Inland Empire</A></SMALL>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18539518</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 20 Jun 2007 12:37:48 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
