Why is Google Earth free? One possibility, it is run by liberals who do not want to gouge anyone. (Meaning they can't figure out how to stick it to the rich.) Another possibility is a business plan to create a demand and then institute a fee subscription. A third possibility, it is profitable through on page ads and fees charged for links to secondary sites.
The business plan possibility of future fees will raise liberals hackles. When traffic to the site reach a certain threshold, subscription fees become increasingly desirable. The company decides when to begin subscription fees and announces the date for implementation requiring subscription to continue access.
The net neutrality proponents use this scenario as one reason why internet regulation is necessary. Such regulation would be ineffective. The company can move the data and servers outside the jurisdiction of the regulators. Besides, there are existing laws that can be used to ensure "fairness."
Microsoft is a prime example. The Clinton administration brought unfair trade practices against Microsoft resulting in a settlement by Microsoft. No one will admit it also caused the collapse of the stock market tech sector stocks. The timing of the collapse following the settlement was coincidence.
The information used by Google Earth is not proprietary. Anyone can obtain the information. Develop software to use the data. If Google Earth did go subscription, other small providers would spring up serving a localized area. Charge a subscription fee, claiming to be more accurate, more up to date, or cite improvement of some other facet to be competitive.
The market place will always outperform regulation. In fact regulation stymies innovation. In the long run, the product will be better and cheaper if unregulated. Net neutrality is not about fairness, it is about power and control.
No comments:
Post a Comment