Re: S.Korea broadband firm sues Netflix after traffic surge

[Allen McKinley Kitchen (gmail)]

..Allen

> On Oct 20, 2021, at 15:43, Matthew Walster <matt...@walster.org> wrote, among 
> other things:
> 
> Seems pretty disingenuous to now say the called party has to pay as well, in 
> stark contrast to decades of precedent with their telephone product, just 
> because their customers are actually using what they were sold.

Let me add a (perhaps naïve) perspective:

When speaking of calling party costs, there are two costs in that model: the 
cost of access to the network (recurring telephone line charges) and the cost, 
if metered, of making an actual call.

My analogy looks something like this: as the manager of a telecom system where 
hundreds of clinical dictators were calling at all hours, while I did not pay 
for any individual incoming calls, it was a necessary business expense for me 
to have sufficient connection to the network – that is to say, a sufficient 
number of telephone lines. The cost for dozens of T1 lines was not a small 
budget item.

So, in one sense, I as a called party did indeed find it necessary to pay 
substantial fees for the privilege of being called.

And when I instituted toll-free calling, of course I paid significantly more.

I totally agree that this is not a perfect analogy. But I have some sympathy 
for both parties in this debate.

Blessings..

..Allen