tdiddy

Of course they would sue, silly to think otherwise! This is Fox. Anything good for the consumer surely cannot be good for the coffers of Rupert. Also see synonyms: Republican National Party, and Corporate America.

The vertical integration of bootleg DVDs. And Hollywood spends its time chasing down the guy on the corner or one-off downloader. Pfft..

Yes, but c’mon man. Don’t buy into the carrier’s fictional boundaries. Data is data is data, whether the tablet has a 10 inch screen or a 3 inch screen. If you want to pay for a voice minute or text package at a premium rate, fine they offer that on a phone plan. But if you just want data and bring your own device, who cares what it is? Just don’t give access to cellular voice calling if the consumer hasn’t subscribed.

Lots of different scenarios but let me throw one out at you that works for me. I pay $20 per month to Verizon for 1gb data with NO TAXES added. LTE or 3G in fact. I use Skype, Google Voice (GrooveIP), iMessage, and FaceTime. At that rate I can buy a new unlocked unsubsidized device every year with the dough I am saving.

My mouth is agape reading the unwillingness to go quietly into that goodnight.
There will be no Rocky II though for you RIM.

Paul: good luck!
Verge staff: I implore you to do the right thing when you learn Paul has moved to a shack in the Montana woods.

Oh hey, it’s the ‘Apple Killer’ 2.0. Blackberry Storm, we hardly knew ye.

Of course they would vote it down. A for-profit corporation, and by extension its shareholders, would see net neutrality against their pocketbooks’ best interests. Anytime you may potentially have to provide more or fair service for the fees your customer pays will count against the bottom line. Now what’s good for the public at large, that is different. But when did corporations answer to the public-at-large? Just ask Paul Miller, socialism: “it’s bad.”