From the article: Shouldn't the ISPs be paying YouTube a co-marketing fee?
No. Firstly, this undermines the argument because if my ISP pays YouTube then how would my ISP give me a free broadband connection? Secondly, such payment is premature optimisation. This makes it harder for superior alternatives to come to the fore. This is a core argument of network neutrality.
So, I'd vastly prefer a level playing field with flat rate access rather than a free service offered on terms suitable to vested interests.
No. Firstly, this undermines the argument because if my ISP pays YouTube then how would my ISP give me a free broadband connection? Secondly, such payment is premature optimisation. This makes it harder for superior alternatives to come to the fore. This is a core argument of network neutrality.
So, I'd vastly prefer a level playing field with flat rate access rather than a free service offered on terms suitable to vested interests.