Network Neutrality

The internet is a resource with ever expanding content and applications for everyone to use however, net neutrality rules on the free use of internet remains a debated topic. The “Point/Counterpoint: Network Neutrality Nuances” presents Barbara van Schewick’s supportive argument on the applications of net neutrality rules, and the consequences of failing to do so. Schewick’s engaging justifications are well researched with arguments containing significant amounts of examples, strong and simplistic diction to reach her audience, and clean and smooth transitions to move between ideas.

It is often regarded as the notion that, the broadband service provider should charge customers only for Internet access without any form of discrimination or favoritism on content viewed by end-users from their respective content providers. The concept of “Net Neutrality” is intended to regulate price and promote competition. Simply put, it is a premised on the principle that all Internet traffic must be treated equally without bias. “Opponents of the Net neutrality on the other hand, see bandwidth as a private resource, one that is supplied most efficiently if exclusive owners take responsibility for managing and conserving it, and are able to optimize its value by exerting control over the content and application it conveys” (Yoo,

To be completely honest, I have never heard Net-Neutrality before this discussion post. After doing some research on this topic, I’ve come to the conclusion that I am against Net-Neutrality.

[1] The concept of net neutrality is that all data on the internet must be treated equally. So, this means that internet service providers cannot use deep packet inspection [2] (which is reading information contained in a packet to detect signs of unwanted or “unsavory” data) or any other means to discriminate against specific types of data or content they don’t necessarily agree with. One important aspect of the argument is how such a system would affect minority/low-income groups. I believe that net neutrality is an overall benefit to such communities.

While Internet Service Providers (ISPs) want to create a tiered approach, saving the faster speeds for their premium customers while charging “heavy band-with users” in order to generate revenue, enhance their systems and build more robust, more advanced networks,

What is net neutrality? Net neutrality is when an internet service provider can block us from being able to use whatever application, web site, and products we may desire to use unless we basically pay for them, therefore limiting our access to whatever we desire.

Net Neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers should enable access to all content and applications regardless of the source, and without favoring or blocking particular services or websites. If we were to lose Net Neutrality, then we will inevitably lose all innovation, creativity, and the spread of great ideas on the internet, allowing only the wealthy and powerful to have complete access to the internet. Without net neutrality, we would see a decrease in innovation, the gap of accessibility of information between the rich and poor would increase, we would start to see a rise in censorship in content, which violates free thinking and freedom of speech. The fight against net neutrality is also a very modern one, and is still being fought today, and many advocates for net neutrality will continue to fight until the internet is safely open and free to everyone.

The concept of net neutrality is the fact that all internet service providers, or ISPs, have to treat all data on the internet the same, without regard to content, platform, etc(Wikipedia). The main purpose of this law is to prevent ISPs from executing abusive business practices that harm education and promote censorship. Without net neutrality ISPs would have control over the internet and what the consumers see. What this means is that companies can pay ISPs to be part of their service, and the companies that can’t pay will be slowed down. There are no downsides to net neutrality to the consumer, however from a business point of view ISPs won’t be making as much money(Debate.org). However that downside is easily outweighed by the several harms

“Net neutrality shackles the internet with rules and regulations designed for the bygone era of the black rotary phone rules that made sense in 1934 but not today”. This is a quote from Brian Paul who is a reporter from “The Mercury News” which is based in San Jose, California. Net Neutrality is the idea that all internet service providers should treat all lawful internet content equally and it is restricting the dynamic and ever-changing landscape of modern computing. Although, on the other side of the argument many people like Tim Berners-Lee who is known to be the creator of the world wide web say “Neutral networks are critical to ensuring fair, open competition in the content market and driving America's growth in the digital era”. It is

These lanes will be beneficial to an individual company but is not good for customers who will have deal with inconsistencies (The Economist). Net Neutrality proposes a consumer-happy approach which is the main concern for network owners.

Net neutrality is an issue that has gained traction within the past few years. The reading brought to light the deeper, issues associated with the information services and wired infrastructure. The debate at its core is about ISPs. Due to issues involved with ISPs invoking price discrimination against media providers, issues have arisen about data caps, bit-torrent throttling, and the classification structure. While changes can be made to the law to negate these unethical practices, laws need to be well thought out to include the current issues and issues that may arise within the foreseeable future. One could state that no isp’s shall require data providers to pay a higher fee for the ‘fast lane’. However, then the isp’s could require their

"Net neutrality is an issue that's been on the agenda in the U.S. for years but it actually affects people all over the world. The net neutrality is a set of rules that prohibits companies, organizations, corporations, from playing favorites or regulating the sites that how much traffic and fast traffic can flow to. Every site on internet is equal and no one can restrict access or slow down access to any particular site or service and puts everything on the internet on an equal playing field that everyone has access to the same internet speed, every site has access to the same users, we really can't restrict access to anything and when we say that they repeal net neutrality, it is essentially means that they are making it right for companies to say like well on the service that i'm going to block your access to this site or i am going to slow down the speed at which you can access a particular site or a particular service and you could

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

There is an interesting topic circulating in the news. Net Neutrality, most likely don't know what that means. Net Neutrality is the idea that companies should not be able to make certain internet connections slower or worse based on a biased. Some people are really upset about the idea that companies will not abide by Net Neutrality rules. This is ridiculous, companies don't agree on most things and most likely won’t all make the switch at the same time, it will also be more expensive due to increased monitoring of internet traffic, and like some other things that are widely use such as television not everyone is able to pay extra money to have access to the web sites they use.

Network neutrality is something that almost all people have an opinion on. Very few people could think about the idea of all information on the internet being neutral, without getting an instant opinion. The idea that companies, government, and organizations would have the ability to sensor and choose what comes up on any internet searches. The two sides are as stated: everything that comes up on the internet should be unbiased (thus resulting “neutral”). The other side states that the internet, companies, etc should be able to use our past internet searches to “help” us and make the results more “relatable” our lives. This concept, that most don’t think about, has been debated for over a decade; at this point, there is still no definitive