There has got to be a tax on the (information) superhighway

Some telecoms carrier bigwigs are proposing a content tax on Internet connections: Over the top (OTT) players also need to play a role, according to Mittal. “If we have to build the highways, there has got to be a tax on highways. You cannot have automobiles running on these highways which are paying nothing,” he … Continue reading “There has got to be a tax on the (information) superhighway”

Some telecoms carrier bigwigs are proposing a content tax on Internet connections:

Over the top (OTT) players also need to play a role, according to Mittal. “If we have to build the highways, there has got to be a tax on highways. You cannot have automobiles running on these highways which are paying nothing,” he said.

Dear Mister Telecoms Operator,

I do not remember receiving any of your service provision for free. In fact, every data bit I receive while at Mobile World Congress is being paid for at a ridiculously over-the-top rate. I also pay a monthly subscription to your services whether I use them or not. In fact, I think you’re getting excellent value from me considering you’re selling me something and I am paying for it and I’m not even using all of the “stuff” I’m paying for. Thinking about this, you owe me.

What you propose would mean I, the consumer, would be paying for empty bits unless the content silos also pay for the very same bits. And I’m pretty sure that you don’t give Apple or Amazon or Google their Internet connections free and gratis. I’m sure they’re paying for them.

This is what is considered to be double-dipping. In fact, as Google already pays for transmitting their bits and we already pay to access those same bits from the Internet, imposing a tax at both ends of this would constitute triple dipping or worse. I wish I was at that session because I’m sure I would have thrown a shoe.

So, please fuck off.

Sincerely,

Matt