My final question is one that's on a lot of peoples' minds right now. As Microsoft definitely gets into IP, high-def movie downloads, content on your PC and your Xbox and all these different Microsoft hardware platforms, how are rulings on net neutrality and net neutrality law going to affect Microsoft's business?
Microsoft wants people to build internet infrastructure that has the ability to feed high definition video to every screen in your house, so we want the incentive to be there for people to build up new networks and we want that network to be something that content from everyone is sort of treated in a reasonably equal way. So we had the content people saying things that would have eliminated the incentives to build better networks, and we have the people who want the network incentives saying, hey, just trust us, we won't do those things. Those were the two sides. Craig Mundie was kind of a fair broker because we need both.
We need the content people to see this as an open platform so they'll keep innovating, including ourselves, and we need these new networks built. There's regulatory models in Europe where the high-capacity networks just won't be built because they've set sort of equalization in terms of the sublease rate, the wholesale pricing rate that means you're just not gonna do a high-definition interactive network. And you're not going to get the enablement that comes with that. It's this complicated stuff. Craig, and the people that work with Craig spend time in DC.
We thought there was a way that gave people the best of both worlds. Apparently, AT&T committed to some flavor of this as part of their FCC thing. Every country is different on this, and this is a very complex thing. In its purest form you eliminate the incentive to build better networks so you have to be careful about that.
It's really unfortunate that some of these networks in Europe are not being built because of these regulations and I think a lot of people want to know that Microsoft is on the same side as the consumer and they want to enable networks to be built that are not regulated by net neutrality laws.
Right! But you're either a network company who don't want any restrictions, or a content company who doesn't understand the disincentive to building out the networks. There were tons of things proposed that would have made the US just like Europe. These are complex issues. What the consumer wants, in terms of, hey, my network gives me access to everything but it's also very high-speed -- that's the ideal for us. And as a big company in the industry, it's incumbent -- it's a part of our responsibility is to learn these complex issues and not let either the extreme things block what really should happen.
The US did have a problem in the 1996 act that it had as an assumption that sub-leasing could do this magic thing, and how did that go? Why is Korea ahead of us? It's a complex thing. I think we're doing the right things. Go and look at the AT&T filing; I haven't looked at it specifically, and see if you think that strikes a good balance.
Facebook
Twitter