dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
11
share rss forum feed


tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to NOVA_UAV_Guy

Re: Winning the war on Cord Cutters

said by NOVA_UAV_Guy:

I see where you're going but your analogy doesn't hold up. At best, Netflix using Comcast's connection to provide user-requested content is akin to someone having a package ordered from Amazon delivered to them in Best Buy's parking lot.

The parking lot is still Best Buy's Private* property and it would be reasonably and legal to charge Amazon (or fedX) a fee for using it for delivery

The argument against Netflix was really about their CDN provider L3 which attempted to avoid standard port cost by mixing their transit business with their CDN business.
Netflix's didn't really do anything wrong (other than believe/back L3's bluff to provide CDN services so much cheaper than others in the market.
The ISP (ComCast in that case) wasn't as dumb a pipe as you believe and resisted funneling Netflix's deliver costs through L3 to ALL CC customers, rather than the relatively few(at that time) that actually used Netflix, CC saw the future where everyone's transit and CDN costs were pushed to end users equally, rather than the individuals paying for outside services paying the full cost INCLUDING delivery.

Think of an apt. complex that pays for every tenant's deliveries and then bills the average amount to ALL tenants, heavy users love it, those in the small apts(low tiers) who order little or nothing are subsidizing the shop/ship-o-holics in the other units.
Hardly the fairness the Network Neutrality implies.

*actually a mall/land leasing company which charges BB a high cost per square foot for exclusive use of the store and semi exclusive use of X number of nearby parking spots FedX could contract with them directly, but BB would want to pay less for the parking lot.