Alex Curtis at Public Knowledge has an excellent write up of panel at the recent State of the Network event he attended. The panel discussed the policy of three strikes then disconnection that the trade associations have been flogging. Except, as Alex points out, those associations declined to attend.
Left to their own, the panelists supporting the associations’ agendas committed some pretty telling missteps.
an ISP representative asked what would happen to terminated users who use VOIP as their sole telephony service, effectively cutting off homes from 911 emergency calls? There were two fairly shocking responses: Perlmutter essentially said that ISPs have ways of making distinctions between VOIP and other Internet traffic (implying that ISPs should monitor all subscribers traffic using deep packet inspection) and MP Robertson said that if someone is breaking the law via infringement, their service has to be “withdrawn” (read: terminated or otherwise suspended).
As with the last story I mentioned, defenders of disconnection need to be held to a much higher rhetorical bar. This kind of muddled, non-answer would be enough to torpedo policy positions in any number of other debates, why not here?