"Again, I'm talking about IP transport, not about services like TV. Just the transport by itself.
IP connectivity is one of the purist commodities. You can't differentiate yourself except by selling more, you can't afford any fine grained billing and even then can't assure the packets won't accidentally ride a competitors infrastructure and we need it as a public good."
You are right, you cannot charge Video packets or voice packets, because you cannot differentiate them.
You can differentiate in base of the bandwidth consumed.
But: "If you follow this one step further you come to a very stark conclusion those who don't have their own infrastructure have a major advantage over those that do.
If we do not allow collusion between the content providers and the transport providers then owning the facilities is a major competitive disadvantage.
We've seen this in VoIP but the large capital expenses and cellular income has kept this stark reality from being too obvious."
In VoIP the content belongs to the person who uses the service.
In IPTV or VOD it doesn't.
And somebody HAS to pay to see it. Unless they kill copyrights (difficult).
The only way is YouTube.
Customers' owned content.
But that has nothing to do with traditional TV. Or Cable TV or VOD.
YouTube is like VoIP. You use the Internet for transporting your own content.
And you just pay for transporting it. On the base of the bandwidth you consume.
That is why you have a stamp size format and mediocre quality. (for now)
And that is why Cable TV and Satellite TV IS STILL a very good business. (as long as it lasts)