more on net neutrality

Further to my previous comments, there's an argument on Crikey.com that suggests that enforcing net neutrality would be a bad move that freezes innovation. The implication here seems to be: let all decisions made by ISPs over pricing structures for different levels of user fall into the marketplace and see what swims and what sinks.

It largely seems to be about internet-delivered television, which would require substantial investment in network infrastructure and understandably higher charges to people who use the internet predominantly for this purpose. In this trend towards [presumably, ultimately, live] online movies and programmes, can one be forgiven for thinking "what about regular terrestrial and satellite broadcast?"?
I guess, like there's only one electromagnetic spectrum, there's only one internet. Funny how it's become so retro-fitted over the years. Copper lines that once carried analogue phone signals are now used to service digital broadband connections.
So does all this exciting online telly need to be available live? Or is it enough in the medium term for it to be available in download form, like podcasts? Listen-again-on-demand can be good, but I imagine the server requirements are enormous, especially if it's to be high-quality video. Perhaps the programmer can stream the material in one go, like television (i.e. you have to watch it at the time it's on), and leave it to us with our ever-growing arsenal of personal video recorders to `tape' it.
No doubt we'll be told that whatever happens it's all in the name of `what the customer wants'. That old mantra. The cynic in me presumes this to mean that the quality and flexibility of delivery will always exceed the quality of the programme material itself.

Having said all this...as a fan of online overseas radio stations and radio programme podcasts, I'd be interested in watching more overseas telly if I could find a good directory of what's on.