Dear FCC,

The proposed curtailment of the Internet Net Neutrality rules will benefit only already-established Internet Service Providers, limit competition, limit free speech, and impose financial burdens on millions of end users.

As has already been seen, the moment that the Net neutrality rules were briefly lifted, one provider immediately established a bandwidth limit on NetFlix traffic. This was ameliorated by a side-deal where NetFlix had to pay to restore their equal footing. It is not a coincidence tha the ISP is also a provider of content that completes with NetFlix, and the end result is that NetFlix and its subscribers got to subsidize the competition.

Likewise, dominant ISP's could easily keep out new competition by limiting traffic that is routed from their subscribers. Imagine that Joe's ISP is looking to enter a market - ComCast or Verizon could limit any traffic to or from Joe's network, creating a poor experience for them, and putting Joe at the mercy of the existing oligopoly. This hypothetical already happened during the rollout of DSL, when new entrants were limited by the Baby Bells (Regional telco Operating Companies) and had to sue for reasonable treatment.

The continued consolidating oligopoly has resulted in a practical monopoly at a local level almost everywhere in the coountry. A resident of any given community typically has one choice of high-speed ISP/Cable/telecom, and the cost to switch the entire community is extremely high. IN the few places where there are practical choices at a single location, the largest player will typically lower their price immediately to drive the new-comer out. The net result is that residents are patying excessive amounts for service because they have little practical choice.

Free speech is the final straw. How long will it take Comcast to entirely block http://comcast-sucks.com or any other website who's content is critical of them or threatens their standing in any way?

Sincerely,
dKeith Brezinsky