  | | . | The Internet was founded by educators and scientists as a means for the "ready and equal access by all". A small church has the same access to information as a multi-billion dollar corporation. Recently, applications such as video on demand and Internet Telephony are using a greater portion of network bandwidth and it is argued that these providers and their subscribers should pay a greater share of the burden for enriching the hardware that makes these applications deliverable by the carriers. PRO: Net Neutrality protects the common Internet user from being blocked or having to pay more to get access to certain content. This is a clear attack by Carriers to take over the free Internet to make more money for themselves. CON: The cost for bandwidth drives carriers to spend billions to add more lanes on the information superhighway with no end in sight. Content providers and their customers who use this bandwidth should pay their fair share of the infrastructure costs to support these applications or we could find ourselves starved for bandwidth. | | MEDIATOR Brian Deagon Technology Journalist / Reporter / Editor Investor's Business Daily | | . | . | . | . | | | PRO Debator #1 Anthony Greenberg CEO RampRate Sourcing Advisors | CON Debator #1 John Savageau Sr VP Operations CRG West | | | . | | | PRO Debator #2 Jim Sevier Founder/President CNVRG Advisory Group | CON Debator #2 Dr. Lakshmi Arunachalam Founder / Chairman / CEO WebXchange, Inc | | | . | | | PRO Debator #3 Ariel Coro CEO The Aptive Group | CON Debator #3 Skyler Visconti Seasoned Technology Expert | | | |
|