"This is about Internet freedom. "Network neutrality" -- the First Amendment of the Internet -- ensures that the public can view the smallest blog just as easily as the largest corporate Web site by preventing Internet companies like AT&T from rigging the playing field for only the highest-paying sites.
But Internet providers like AT&T and Verizon are spending millions of dollars lobbying Congress to gut Net Neutrality. If Congress doesn't take action now to implement enforceable network neutrality provisions, the future of the Internet is at risk."
Hmmm, well that sounds bad. I worked with pretty much all of the big U.S. Telco players at some point or another during the seven years I managed a corporate network. I wouldn't trust any of them as far as I could throw 'em. That said, there's something that doesn't quite smell right about the Save the Internet folks. My "there's more to the picture, than meets the eye" radar is screaming.
Freedom to access any website I want to, legal ones that is, seems pretty fundamental to me. That we need Congress to ensure that right instead of a free market is debatable, but at this point I don't see a problem in pushing a statute to guarantee it. There's something else going on here though and it bothers me, especially when people like Save the Internet use what look to me to be disingenuous arguments to support their view. I'll try not to get too tedious or technical here and by all means, if you think I've got something wrong, please let me know.....