The Internet is built on what Computer Scientists like to call the “end-to-end” principle. Everything important is at the “edges” of the network and is treated equally. It doesn’t matter whether you’re a server or a client; either way, you’ve got a connection to the network. The stuff in the middle just handles moving things between endpoints.
Moving things between endpoints is cheap. Especially since the expectation is that everything will be moved equally. This is what makes communication over the Internet so fast, convenient, cheap, and valuable. Unfortunately, a number of companies whose business models are built on making communication as difficult, slow, troublesome, and expensive as possible are now looking for ways to kill the goose that laid the golden (but radioactive) egg.
As detailed by the Boston Globe, a number of large telecom monopolies are attempting to use their monopoly over residential ISPs to destroy the end-to-end principle. They want to be able to abuse their monopolies to charge more for others to move large quantities of data quickly over their network. This would give a massive competitive advantage to their own online service offerings.
The purpose of this? Kill the Internet. Its decentralized, end-to-end nature has spelled the end (eventually) for traditional business models. The old TV model of one-to-many broadcasts of static content to passive consumers? Largely erased. The old Telco model of one company providing all communication services for everyone in a geographical region? Pointless. And this change means that a lot of people who’ve made a lot of money by controlling and restricting high-cost information distribution and communication can no longer make any money at all.
The first steps towards this were taken months ago, when the FCC rescinded the rule requiring that telcos offer competing ISPs “at cost” access to their physical communication media. Communication media installed and maintained, I should note, by a government-granted monopoly! More steps towards it have been taken more recently, as more and more states succumb to telco pressure and ban municipal wi-fi projects.
Civil liberties activists should pay very close attention to this. Not only does it matter from a commercial point of view. A single service provider makes it much easier for intelligence agencies to mandate features to make their jobs easier. “Wiretapping” backdoors in VoIP programs, for example.
(As seen on Slashdot. Beware raving Objectivist morons.)