Lessig, for instance, is vocal that access tiering violates net neutrality principles because it could involve: (1) discrimination between two content and applications (and between two content and applications providers); and (2) discrimination between a content and application (and provider) and the ISP's own or affiliated content and application.
They argue that regulation is still needed because practices such as access tiering and network management is likely to stifle entry and innovation by the next Google.
Although these types of studies are still in their infancy and similar studies have not been performed for other forms of net neutrality rules, the conclusion that one can draw at this point is that the marginal benefits of the form of rule that prohibits access tiering suggests that the net benefits of these rules are small to negative.
108) In a recent column in the Financial Post, Hal Singer noted two key harms that could result in Canada if net neutrality regulation prohibits access tiering and priority' contracting with content and applications providers:
It is sufficient to note that the Bureau lists the following as possible areas of investigation and enforcement: (a) "Margin squeezing"--defined in section 78(1)(a) of the Competition Act as "squeezing by a vertically integrated supplier, of the margin available to an unintegrated customer who competes with the supplier, for the purpose of impeding or preventing the customer's entry into, or expansion in, a market"; (b) Targeted Pricing"--defined as "[o]ffering certain customers better prices than those offered to other customers"; and (c) "Denial of access to a facility" which has been argued (123) to potentially include access tiering complaints under US antitrust laws.
In my view, there are several problematic sides to access tiering.
Second, access tiering is another word for charging companies a termination fee--a fee to reach customers of the service provider in question.