[IP] Re: Music industry proposes a piracy surcharge on ISPs

[David Farber <dave@farber.net>]

________________________________________
From: Fred von Lohmann [iphone@vonlohmann.com]
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 10:45 PM
To: Brett Glass
Cc: Fred von Lohmann; David Farber
Subject: Re: [IP] Re:     Music industry proposes a piracy surcharge on ISPs

Brett, thst's the advantage of a voluntary collective licensing
system--no one is forced to offer it to their customers (nor does this
force ISPs to carry P2P traffic-that's a different fight). So I
suspect this is just one more way that ISPs will compete. Verizon has
made it clear that it does not fear P2P traffic, both because they've
got the superior FIOS network and because they can afford new caching
technologies.

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 17, 2008, at 8:01 PM, Brett Glass <brett@lariat.net> wrote:

> Fred:
>
> The problem with the EFF's solution is that it does not address the
> impact of P2P on ISPs, as illustrated in the slides at
>
> http://www.brettglass.com/ITIF/pg9.html
>
> and
>
> http://www.brettglass.com/ITIF/pg10.html
>
> No rational ISP would accept any "solution" which did not eliminate
> the crippling, uncompensated costs of P2P. Our ISP, in particular,
> intends to block it until and unless we are compensated for these
> costs, and would consider any attempt to force us to allow P2P an
> unconstitutional "taking" of our network resources.
>
> --Brett Glass
>
> P.S. -- We also believe that Brad Templeton, as a board member of
> BitTorrent, Inc., has an irreconcilable conflict of interest and
> should not be commenting to the public or the press on behalf of the
> EFF on this issue.
>

-------------------------------------------