> Would you object to an ISP model where a content provider could pay to get an > ISP subscriber's package upgraded on a dynamic basis?
Yes - and the reason is extremely simple. There are a lot of ISPs and a lot of plans. If I'm an entrepreneur looking to build Hulu from the ground up in a pre-Hulu world, am I really going to find EVERY ISP who supports this, and then raise the funding to pay them to allow their paying customers to get to my servers? The answer is no. Implementing this kind of system would stunt innovative new ideas that require a level playing field. The more disturbing effect, though, is this: What if I'm a content provider that your ISP doesn't like? I'm out of luck because you won't take my money to deliver my content at the rate I need to your customers - even though you will take my competitors? I don't see how anyone wins. Innovators lose for want of being able to execute. Content providers lose due to having to manage, maintain, and pay out a fee structure that's almost as complex as the routing table. Customers lose as a result of inconsistent and unpredictable usability. ISPs lose as function of customers losing confidence in their ability to provide service (to them, it 'just doesn't work for everything'). Yes, I would object. Nathan
