Network Neutrality Research Paper

What is net neutrality you may ask? Well net neutrality or open internet is legal content and/or applications that internet service providers give you on an equal basis. They cannot have any favorite websites and block others.In my opinion in favor net neutrality. It makes sure every web site is treated equally. This goes for all video,audio,etc. in my future I want to be a entrepreneur and net neutrality helps people get access to broadband networks without any problems! Big companies like Apple, Microsoft, google (and more) also go for net neutrality. As well as those companies there are some that are against net neutrality. Companies such as AT&T, comcast, cox, and verizon are against net neutrality. They said “The rules are too heavy-handed and could stifle investment and innovation.” Again in my opinion i think net neutrality is a great thing because i think everyone should be treated equally and should have the same chance and votes should have a fair play and have no cheating. Of course pirating is extremely illegal and should be corrected, many web sites are being copyrighted and stealing people's identities and these innosite people are getting banked ruped and losing there jobs for using these websites. Net neutrality is basically the human rights but on computers people need and deserve them.For the people that are against net neutrality, a new FCC chairman, ajit pai,worked as a lawyer for verizon and plans to get rid of net neutrality which would be a big win for

Net Neutrality is allowing users to free and open access of internet irrespective of sources or internet providers demanding special charges in order to use services provided by them. Now a days Internet is one of the essential part for everyday communication in life. Several services were used in our day to day life for example GPS tracking, google, Wikipedia, Netflix etc., and we can’t imagine a day without the internet. Internet Service providers combining with corporations were utilizing this and trying to make profit out of this by imposing more charges on the user in order to utilize the services needed for him with more speed and flexibility. There are several discussions and debates supporting and opposing net neutrality.

Attention Getter: When you go online you have certain expectations. You expect to be connected to whatever website you want. You expect that your cable or phone company isn’t messing with the data and is connecting you to all websites, applications and content you choose. You expect to be in control of your internet experience. When you use the internet you expect Net Neutrality.

The second video “Moyers & Company: Is Net Neutrality Dead?” is about a debate regarding net neutrality, which is the right to communicate freely online, keeping the major internet service providers like Verizon and Comcast from increasing costs for costumers to not slow down or block any content they want to use, also called price discrimination, a service offered at different prices by the same provider in different markets. As there are only few internet providers, barriers are set by limiting the area where some of them are allowed to supply their services to, limiting competition and increasing costs for consumers.

An open internet ensures that the larger companies do not have an advantage over the tiny startup businesses. It makes a level playing filed with the mom and pops store as well as the big businesses. The internet is neutral, where everything is delivered as fast as possible to the end user. Without this it would be much harder to make any profit starting a small online business. Some of the arguments against net neutrality include no compensation with data usage.

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.

In the IEEE CTN issue of June 2014, It was noted that “evolution and technological innovation in communication systems, digital media, and user behavior may challenge Net Neutrality principles and question if or how Net Neutrality can be sustained in a new word of data-hungry applications such as on-demand video, online gaming, and music streaming” (IEEE, 2014). In the same CTN issue, specific Net Neutrality principles included, among others, no connection blocking, bandwidth transparency, universal connectivity, and best effort

Berners-Lee questions whether America “[wants] a web where cable companies determine winners and losers online?” and cable companies are able to “decide which opinions we read”. To an extreme level, cable companies would be able to determine “which creative ideas succeed” (Berners-Lee 2). This opposes the freedom that American citizens strive for. It puts a limits the equal opportunity that so Americans find so important. Furthermore, “the change would allow internet-service providers to throttle some online traffic and allow companies to pay extra for faster delivery of their content” (Martinez & Hoisington). Without net neutrality, internet-service providers would be able to smother small or upcoming businesses by limiting their audience. However, the impact of the repeal of net neutrality does not stop here. The repeal of net neutrality “also eliminates several other consumer protections, such as a requirement that ISPs be more transparent with customers about hidden fees and the consequences of exceeding data caps” (Brodkin 1). Repealing net neutrality would deregulate internet-service providers, allowing them to have far too much control over their

However, the same article also points out that there is disagreement as to whether or not this can actually be seen in the real world, as there could be other factors that affected investment at these times besides net neutrality.[5] And not only that, but according to the LA Weekly, “What the End of Net Neutrality Could Mean to L.A.” the extra financial costs that would likely be associated with a non-neutral net would have a guaranteed impact on the affordability of internet in these

Since net neutrality forces Internet Service Providers to treat all content equally, people can have equal opportunity on the internet. Blocking, throttling, and slowing websites is restricted with net neutrality, so everybody gets to have equal competition on the internet. Without net neutrality Internet Service Providers would have the ability to throttle companies that support them, and block competitor companies and their services. This would start monopolies that restrict smaller companies from selling products and services. People also have suspicions that Internet Service Providers will start to make people pay microtransactions to have access to each individual site or group of sites on the internet. Because net neutrality evens the playing field for all users of the internet, net neutrality promotes

The internet is a place of creativity and ambition. The internet allows people to connect with others through websites like Facebook and Twitter. The internet allows users to stream music from sites like Pandora and Spotify. Without net neutrality, the creation of these sites would be impossible.

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

The concept of network neutrality (more commonly referred to as net neutrality) has been a fixture of debates over United States telecommunications policy throughout the first decade of the twenty-first century. Based upon the principle that internet access should not be altered or restricted by the Internet Service Provider (ISP) one chooses to use, it has come to represent the hopes of those who believe that the internet still has the potential to radically transform the way in which we interact with both people and information, in the face of the commercial interests of ISPs, who argue that in order to sustain a competitive marketplace for internet provision, they must be allowed to differentiate their services. Whilst this debate has

Throughout the last decade, the idea of Net Neutrality has been the topic of many debates. Net Neutrality is the idea that Internet service providers should not be allowed to block their users from any content regardless of its source. The Debate is still continuing in 2017 with the F.C.C planning to repeal Net Neutrality and allow internet providers to completely regulate what their users can see and charge the users extra for “luxuries” such as social media, messaging, email, and music. There are two sides of this argument, one side believes that Net Neutrality should be taken away, while others believe that it is unfair for the Internet providers to have the right to take away the access to any content. Internet providers should not be allowed to control what content one can view when surfing the internet.

In this field, competition refers to network owners (ISP). Their differential in pricing and control of information alters the competition. Anti-competitive acts by network owners would be barred due to the impact of net neutrality (St. Petersburg). The major companies (telecom and cable) could enforce a fee for faster Internet or prefer content that is associated with their partnered conglomerates. The cause would be a halt in innovation and end up giving larger companies the power to nudge aside the smaller start-ups from expanding (Linux Journal). Also, net neutrality saves the internet as an ideal marketplace. For the previous 10 years, the Internet has been a public marketplace where privatized companies are able to expand and grow, and this reputation will continue to serve (Opposing Views). More importantly, without net neutrality in affect, price discrimination risks start-ups from emerging out of their cocoons. Net neutrality once paved the concept of free market endeavors. Without these regulations, innovators are at the hands of network owners and building new online entrepreneurships or