Do you know this for a fact? Do you work for Comcast?
Like I said, your arguments make sense up until the point where you defend Comcast as if you were sure you understood why they do things. (Curiously, they come across as fair, Cogent comes across as a villain and Netflix as a freeloader, the view on Comcast is easily proven false since they’ve been lying about throttling from the beginning)
You’re saying that Comcast could have throttled traffic while the FCC was still involved, yet chose not to. But this was something that was precisely in dispute while there was still an organization that had jurisdiction. And once they did it, they lied about it, this is not insignificant.
The other point is that intentions don’t matter, when your ISP limits access between parties on the internet, the internet is weakened, the fact that there is no neutrality to the content being delivered makes it a net neutrality issue.
It also doesn’t matter if the people with apple TV’s aren’t affected if you’ve already affected service for the majority of your and Netflix customers, then that argument gets you nowhere, especially since the apple TV installed base will be clearly lower than the PC, smart TV, smartphone, Roku using lionshare of your audience.
You say they were not out to punish or get a direct deal with Netflix yet this was the outcome.
Just out of curiosity, but are the Cogent-Comcast troubles over then? That would be telling wouldnt it?
You see, there are a few possible interpretations of this, and the one you propose makes the assumption that Comcast is being fair with its customers and its partners, that they are not interested in maximizing profits, that the lack of net neutrality has not affected customers and will not affect competition in the future, that the fee customer’s pay does not cover Comcast’s operating expenses, That the deal between Cogent and Comcast was both unfair and legally non-binding, that Comcast is telling us the unvarnished truth, and that Comcast has not tried to hide their role in this from their customers.
Your argument that this is all about peering is simple because it relies on a lot of other factors being true. Yet some are unproven, others false on their face.
The argument I and the writer of this article are making only makes the assumption that Comcast is greedy and doesn’t care for its customers. (not about but FOR its customers) And STILL allows Cogent and Netflix to share in the blame, (Because the business dealings between companies is not what affects me and you in the long run, the matter of who owns the customer and selling access to him/her does.)
