Have you ever gone onto the internet and wondered, what if this information I’m looking for was not so easily obtained? What if I was charged money for access to this information? What if the internet just wasn’t this simple? Well, if you have, you can thank Network Neutrality for the ease of internet research. Network Neutrality is a concept that encompasses the idea of a free and open internet. As a CRS Report for Congress entitled “Net Neutrality: Background and Issues” states, “There is no single definition for net neutrality,” however, they define it as “The move to place restrictions on the owners of the networks that compose and provide access to the Internet, to ensure equal access and non-discriminatory treatment.” This concept seeks to eliminate internet discrimination. It holds the idea that internet services should treat all sources of data the same, no matter what they may be. According to www.freepress.net, “Net Neutrality means that Internet service providers may not discriminate between different kinds of content and applications online. It guarantees a level playing field for all Web sites and Internet technologies.” This concept of Net Neutrality allows us—the general public—to obtain information needed in a seemingly free and non-complex way—as www.freepress.net states, “without any interference of the network provider.” An open internet, free to all, has existed since the internet began, but not written into law—posing potential problems that may arise with net neutrality and unwanted changes.
The concept of Network Neutrality is one that has been long part of our countries history. However, this concept is recently being brought to the public’s attention. As www.cybertelecom.org states, opponents of network neutrality seem to argue that there is no history of net neutrality, while those who support net neutrality argue within the development of the communication system there does exist a history of net neutrality. Proponents argue that Net Neutrality is the “evolution of a long communications policy debate.” Eli Noam, a Professor of Economics and Finance at the Columbia Business School states that this history is created through a three part cycle—wildcatting, backlash and control and loosening of control. The history leading to the emergence of Net Neutrality can be dated back to 200 years ago with the development of the postal service. The postal service was developed in hopes to create a communications service free from the monitoring of the British Military. To do so, Congress asked current President Benjamin Franklin to create a postal service where messages could be sent with full privacy on its journey to its destination. This trend towards Net Neutrality was noticed again, 50 years later, when the importance of telegraph messages being “transmitted securely, in the order received, accurately, and without discrimination.” This lead to telegraph carriers becoming “Common Carriers”—which still exist today—defined as “carriers of goods, people, and information”—who have played, and still do, a large role in the development of Net Neutrality. Another part of this evolution of Net Neutrality was the FCCs announcement in 1966 that stated telecommunications carriers should be opened to computer networks. A further timeline of the years 2003-2005—provided by www.cybertelecom.org and shown below– represents the final communication policy debates leading to the emergence of Network Neutrality.
2003: FCC rolled back UNE rules, making local telecommunications competition difficult
2004: The FCC ruled that new fiber installs did not have to be unbundled to permit competition
2005: The Supreme Court ended the long open access debate - affirming the FCC's ruling that Internet-over-cable service providers were not telecom carriers and did not have to be open their physical networks to permit competition in higher level services and applications
2005: The FCC ruled that Internet-over-DSL service providers were not telecom carriers and did not have to open their networks
This timeline and aforementioned information helps provide an insight into the development of Net Neutrality.
The idea of Net Neutrality has become a common issue throughout the United States since 2005. With Net Neutrality being something that was always part of the internet, the idea for change of this concept has caused quite the uproar. In 2005, the FCC created a policy statement consisting of four different principles (CRS Report for Congress):
1. Consumers are entitled to access the lawful internet content of their choice
2. Consumers are entitled to run applications and services of their choice (subjects to the need of law enforcement)
3. Consumers are entitled to connect their choice of legal devices that do not harm the network
4. Consumers are entitled to competition among network providers, application and service providers, and content providers
2003: FCC rolled back UNE rules, making local telecommunications competition difficult
2004: The FCC ruled that new fiber installs did not have to be unbundled to permit competition
2005: The Supreme Court ended the long open access debate - affirming the FCC's ruling that Internet-over-cable service providers were not telecom carriers and did not have to be open their physical networks to permit competition in higher level services and applications
2005: The FCC ruled that Internet-over-DSL service providers were not telecom carriers and did not have to open their networks
This timeline and aforementioned information helps provide an insight into the development of Net Neutrality.
The idea of Net Neutrality has become a common issue throughout the United States since 2005. With Net Neutrality being something that was always part of the internet, the idea for change of this concept has caused quite the uproar. In 2005, the FCC created a policy statement consisting of four different principles (CRS Report for Congress):
1. Consumers are entitled to access the lawful internet content of their choice
2. Consumers are entitled to run applications and services of their choice (subjects to the need of law enforcement)
3. Consumers are entitled to connect their choice of legal devices that do not harm the network
4. Consumers are entitled to competition among network providers, application and service providers, and content providers
These four principles seek to maintain and uphold Net Neutrality. However, many companies did not agree with this policy and were actually found violating this. In 2008, the FCC stated that Comcast Corporations violated the policy by “selectively” blocking peer-to-peer connections in order to maintain traffic. As the FCC stated it, “unduly interfered with Internet users’ right to access the lawful Internet content and to use the applications of their choice,” and this right here is what is causing the conflict with Net Neutrality. Big cable and telephone companies are now looking to charge money for access to internet website, speed to run applications, and permission to plug in devices. This means that no longer will the ease of maintaining information on the internet exist and no longer will any of it be free. Another stress to be added to American lives. The internet is a place where one can easily maintain information on anything possible, for that to be stripped from us, would be stripping our legal freedom to access information. Due to this issue, a Non-Profit Organization—Save the Internet—was created in 2008. This coalition—coordinated by the Free Pres—is composed of hundreds of groups—from different political standings—that seek to maintain free and open internet. With this attempted change in Net Neutrality, various questions arise. Questions such as, what could happen if net neutrality is lost, how much will this access cost, and how can we protect net neutrality seem to be constantly surrounding this issue. As www.freepress.net states, if net neutrality was lost “Innovation would be stifled, competition limited, and access to information restricted. Consumer choice and the free market would be sacrificed to the interests of a few corporations.” Also stated, “…without Net Neutrality, the Internet will look more like cable TV.” Consumers will no longer be able to choose what they want at the ease of the button, but rather look through a guide, determine what information they want, and then most likely pay for that information. And who knows how much this access will cost.
Who wants to get rid of Net Neutrality? Well, that’s an easy question. The larger telephone and cable companies which already make much money are those that want to rid of Net Neutrality. Companies such as, Comcast, AT&T, Verizon and Time Warner Cable seek to become “internet Gatekeepers.” Not only do they want to control access to the websites, but also how slow or how fast, or if at all, the page loads. As stated by www.freepress.net these larger companies want to “…tax content providers to guarantee speedy delivery of their data. And they want to discriminate in favor of their own search engines, Internet phone services and streaming video -- while slowing down or blocking services offered by their competitors.” It all comes down to money—the more the client is willing to pay, the better the speed and access to that internet site will be. These large cable providers are willing to pay millions of dollars to get rid of Net Neutrality leading to the concern of no longer having simple internet access. Although there may be these large cable and telephone providers shoveling out money and fighting for the rid of Net Neutrality, there are still many individuals and larger companies fighting against this. Many people are in support of Net Neutrality, coming forth and voicing their opinion on this situation. Individuals and companies have taken a stand for keeping Net Neutrality—one of these individuals being current President Barack Obama—who states that he will “not take a back seat to no one” in his support for Net Neutrality. Companies such as Amazon.com, EBay, Intel, Microsoft, Facebook and Yahoo are supports of Net Neutrality. Also, individuals such as “Internet pioneer” Vint Cerf, Stanford Law Professor Lawrence Lessig and FCC commissioner Michael Corps hope that stronger protection will be brought for Net Neutrality. Papers have also been found in support and seeking to protect the internet such as, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chornicle, San Jose Mercury News, Seattle Times, St.Petersburg Times, and Christian Science Monitor. With all these people in support of Net Neutrality, it leaves hope for citizens of the United States that rely on this free and open internet.
In my personal opinion, I believe that Net Neutrality is essential for the United States to remain functional and prevent any riots that could occur with changes. Although there may not be a law protecting Net Neutrality, isn’t it our own natural right to have access to the free internet? As citizens of the United States we are guaranteed freedom of speech and given rights. I think that it should be an assumed right to have access to the internet without worry about being charged service fees. It is a way in which people maintain everyday information. It is a way for us to broaden our spectrum of information. A way for us to know what is going on in the world. I think to myself, how I would have done this assignment without such ease of the internet. The truth is, I probably would have given up and refused to pay any service fees. Net Neutrality in my opinion is a common right, and a law should be made in order to protect it. Free internet should be considered a freedom, and should not be stripped from US citizens. Linked below are sources that help to stress the importance of keeping Net Neutrality around, and what it could mean for us if we do not.
No comments:
Post a Comment