Net Neutrality Rules

"Most people in America use the internet, and when they use it they should expect to be free to search and post what they want; that is except unless they're intentionally posting or viewing something that is against the law. It's been a theory for some time that the government can view the American peoples' internet searches and browsing history, but are they and should they be doing it at all? Like in the earlier stages of our country, we will and most likely continue to have conflict with our government about certain issues, but the internet and things concerning it seems to be one of the major issues right now.

In the article, “Net neutrality hits a nerve, eliciting intense reactions”, Cecilia Kang discusses how the pending repeal of Net Neutrality by the FCC and Chairman, Ajit Pai, is adamantly contested by most of the Internet community and most companies, big or small. To develop her argument, Kang uses a wide variety of appeals from established and startup companies, statistics and evidence related to the reaction to the repeal, and demonstrations on how polarizing the issue is, and the repeal’s effect on solving the problem of Internet regulation. Kang cites a multitude of Internet-based companies or organizations, such as Mozilla, Google, Netflix, and Free Press, to demonstrate their concern and clarify their resentment of the repeal. For instance, Google and Netflix argued that “telecom companies should not be able to split sites because that would allow them to become a sort of gatekeeper.” These responses better clarify companies’ concerns about the repeal and its effect on their business, while also aiding Kang in developing her article on explaining the concern and the response it has elicited. According to Kang,

But what exactly is Net neutrality? Net neutrality means cable companies such as Time Warner Cable and Verizon cannot charge more for faster internet speeds. Which means everybody who uses the internet will have the same speed. Hence the word neutrality. Verizon communication sued the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) saying that they do not have jurisdiction over that subject and limiting speeds is a violation of the First Amendment. "The FCC says Net neutrality rules are designed to preserve the internet as an open platform enabling consumer Choice, freedom of expression, and end-user control, competition, and the freedom to innovate without permission." This case went to the US court of appeals for the DC circuit. The courts ruled in favor of a Verizon. The reasoning for the decision is that “FCC has no authority to apply common-carrier obligation like non-discrimination and no-blocking rules to broadband providers.” I agree with this decision. The reason is that the internet should not be like electricity. If you plug your phone into the wall to charge. It's going to have the same amount of current as someone else charging their phone. But what happens if I want to charge my phone faster? I can’t because electricity is neutral. But when I go on the internet and I see it is slow. What happens if I want to make it faster? With Net neutrality I could not make it faster. I want the option to make my internet faster. And what happens to large corporations where internet speed is essential to stay in business? The fact of the matter is that the FCC does not have jurisdiction over this matter. Net neutrality should never be passed. It will only hurt the consumer. In addition, the FCC approved of a $9.25 monthly charge to help low-income families connect to the internet. Three out of the five Commissioners voted for the subsidy plan. This approval is one part of the reform of the fund

Net Neutrality is the principle that Internet Service provider’s should treat all content on the internet equally. Most people in the United States of America want to keep net neutrality. However, the Federal Communications Commission’s chairman, Ajit Pai, wants to stop net neutrality, so many people are protesting to keep net neutrality. Net neutrality promotes innovation and allows freedom, but is seen as unnecessary by the Federal Communications Commission.

Content and internet service providers spoke out as well, increasing the need for some kind of legislation. Various forms of the original guiding principles were proposed as net neutrality legislation; however none of them were passed. Due to the growth of the debate and increasing numbers of complaints, the FCC has proposed their latest set of guidelines called, “preserving the open internet”, to be voted on as net neutrality legislation. Content providers such as Amazon.com, Disney, Facebook, eBay, Microsoft, Google, and Yahoo, and voice over internet protocol company’s like Vonage and Skype, as well as educational or public interest groups such as Educause, Internet2, ACE, Regional Optical Networks, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, are all in favor of passing the “preserving the open internet” legislation. Then there are those against “preserving the open internet” legislation such as telecommunications and cable companies like AT&T, BellSouth, Verizon, Cablevision, Comcast, Cox, Time Warner, Charter Communications, and hardware manufacturers such as Cisco, Nortel, and VeriSign (Greenfield, 2006).

Net Neutrality basically gives people the right to be on an open internet. Earlier this year, the FCC adopted net neutrality rules. However, the lawsuit was due to the fact that the US Telecom Association thought they did it by violating administrative law. During the court session, it was debated that the FCC violated the providers first amendment rights about deciding what content to distribute. The FCC attorneys

At the 2016 Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas earlier this year, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler told his audience, “John Oliver took the ultimate arcane issue, Title II, and made it something that got people interested. And that’s good.” (Macri, Guiseppe) Mr. Wheeler was referring to a segment by John Oliver, comedian, political satirist which aired June 2014 in which Mr. Oliver cleverly explains Net Neutrality and why it is important to each of us. “During his 13-minute segment, Oliver name-checked Netflix, Google, Usain Bolt, Superman, the game Monopoly, and Mein Kampf, and compared the FCC hiring former cable company lobbyists to ‘needing a babysitter and hiring a dingo.’” (Brody, Ben) (John Oliver on Net Neutrality, can be seen here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpbOEoRrHyU.) He concludes by telling his audience that the FCC is now accepting comments on the matter and encourages us to take advantage of the FCC’s invitation. He then provides the web address. The following day, the FCC receives 45,000 comments resulting from Oliver’s show, which crashes their website. (Macri, Guiseppe)

One of the greatest factors threatening the Internet today is the attempt to dismantle net neutrality. Net neutrality is the idea of an open Internet, one on which people can freely communicate online; some Internet service providers, however, want the right to block or discriminate against any applications or content from which said companies gain no profit. If net neutrality is destroyed, then private corporations have free reign in throttling the sharing of information and of services for their consumers. This would cause private corporations to hold all the business, and we would all become consumers, simply taking what the corporations provide. Not only would this be an assault on the consumer’s right to choose, but this would completely

Net neutrality has been around for quite some time but it was up until now when that us internet users really pay attention to it because our President Donald Trump wants to pass a new net neutrality rule/bill that makes people pay to use apps that were meant to be free like Facebook and Twitter that millions use. “June 2003 Tim Wu coins the phrase network neutrality which was later shortened to net neutrality”. (Tim Wu) According to this quote net neutrality has been around since the summer of 2003 but didn't really take any effect until “February 2004 when the U.S. Federal Communications Commission introduced four principles of network freedom”. (ProQuest Staff) now therefore net neutrality did not affect communities until February of 2004.

I believe that the government does have a right to monitor internet content under certain conditions. As of now certain government officials are wanting to take internet freedom away which many believe isn't right. I personally believe that if the government believes and has proof that there is a serious crime happening on the internet then it should be taken care of. If not, then it shouldn’t be much of a problem.

As written in the article, “Net Neutrality” by publicknowledge.org, net neutrality is “the principle that individuals should be free to access all content and applications equally, regardless of the source, without Internet service providers discriminating against specific online services or websites.” Net neutrality (also known as network neutrality, Internet neutrality and net equality) has two opposing views on whether or not it should be required by law. On one side, there are people that support net neutrality because they are concerned that their internet providers would block Internet applications and content (such as services, websites and protocols) and even go as far as blocking competitors. While on the other side, the people against

On 23 April 2014, the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is reported to be considering a new rule that will permit Internet service providers to offer content providers a faster track to send content, thus reversing their earlier position on net neutrality. Municipal broadband could provide a net neutral environment, according to Professor Susan Crawford, a legal and technology

On May 16, 2018, history may have witnessed net neutrality being saved. This came from a 52-47 vote in the Senate, which overturned the decision of the Federal Communications Commission, FCC, to repeal the doctrines within the Open Internet Order of 2015. This power comes from the Congressional Review Act and will be voted on by the House of Representatives and then to be potentially be signed by the President of the United States. This seems like bureaucracy that does not matter to the individual citizen, however it may shape the internet and affect all of its users.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which is a formal policy actor (Kraft and Furlong, (2015), has faced numerous challenges in resolving the difficulties involving Net Neutrality. Jamison and Layton state that “In 2005, FCC adopted an Internet Policy Statement consisting of four consumer-centric guiding principles, also referred to as the Four Freedoms to ensure that broadband networks are widely deployed, open, affordable, and accessible to all consumers. When the agency attempted to apply these rules in 2008, the DC Circuit rejected the FCC’s decision on jurisdictional grounds. These principles could have been successful if the FCC could have administered this policy. In 2010, the FCC’s second attempt was a light-handed, multistakeholder approach for addressing net neutrality issues. In 2014, the DC Court again reversed the FCC on jurisdictional grounds (Jamison & Layton, 2016).

Yet at the same time, these two sets of companies compete for customers, creating a glaring conflict of interest. Whilst these issues seemed to be resolved by the middle of the twentieth century, the advent of the internet introduced a whole new set of problems. The term net neutrality, first coined by Tim Wu, Professor of the Columbia University Law School in 2003, came to represent a question that had long been perceived as being of relatively little concern – is unfettered access to the internet a right, or a privilege? (Cheng and Bandyopadhay 2011: 60) (Greenstein 2007: 61, 85) The debate around internet regulation and net neutrality first gained traction in 2002, when the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC) controversially ruled that broadband internet was to be classed as an information service rather as a telecommunications service, and thus made it exempt from a considerable range of content and conduct regulations that it would otherwise have been subject to. For those Americans, as exemplified by organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, who saw the internet as a space of uninhibited free expression that needed to be protected from the influence of corporate meddling, this decision was very frustrating. As promoted by Wu and others, net neutrality came to represent the belief that ‘internet data packets should move nondiscriminatorily’ – that is, the data (‘packets’ essentially being a technical