We Need To Regulate The Internet

the August of 2005, the F.C.C. adopted a very important policy statement regarding net neutrality. This policy statement protects several things that are essential to anyone who frequently uses the Internet. It gives consumers the freedom to access any content and to use any application within the law. In early December, 2017, the F.C.C. voted to repeal it. However, just over half of the US states have made attempts to pass legislation that reinforces net neutrality. Net Neutrality protects American “internet freedom”, ensuring that the people can make full use of the internet and prevents Internet Service Providers from having too much control.

Internet service providers like Comcast and Verizon are against network neutrality. Internet providers want the ability to charge users for the bandwidth they use rather than the speed of service they want. This could limit access for many users that cannot afford to pay the higher rates for premium service. In addition, Congress is also working to dismantle the February ruling. Congress does not believe the Communications Act is appropriate for this since it was aimed at telephone and voice services. (Trujillo, 2015) However, when the Communications Act was signed into law in 1934, there was no such thing as the internet much less a computer. As times and technology changes, the Communications Act should be updated to reflect such

(Statement and rebuttal) On November, 21 2017, the F.C.C (Federal Communication Commision) approved a plan made by the F.C.C. Chairman Ajit Pai. His plan consisted in repealing net neutrality to make the internet a safe and better place. Net neutrality is a principle that states that every app, website, and platform should be treated equally. Since the F.C.C. approved this plan, people have been worried about what is going to happen to the internet. People is worried because when the F.C.C. repealed net neutrality they also repealed all the rules that were part of it. Those rules avoided ISP (Internet Service Providers) of blocking, and throttling of every website, app, and platform, but there is something that people doesn’t know. Most of

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).

In just the past few decades, the internet has grown from a new technology, into a staple resource for billions. When anything grows from a service to a necessity, important decisions have to be made about regulating and limiting the control any given party has over them or risk abuse of power. When it comes to the internet, net neutrality is at the forefront of these regulations. Net neutrality, is the idea that access to the internet should be unrestricted and free; According to Emily Hong and Sarah Morris “In the simplest of terms: the FCC rules [on net neutrality] mean no fast and slow lanes on the internet, no blocking of content, and no provider throttling your streaming

The modern day has evolved to one being heavily influenced by social media, a powerful platform for the public. As a result of that, it has become a platform for people to promote progressive ideas for society, as well has become a tool to promote hate. The United States government has a duty to regulate the internet as it potentially could be a tool for illegal activity and has proven to be a harmful tool if used maliciously, but to what extent is too much regulation? The duty of the US government to regulate the internet is one to ensure safety, but not one to violate the civil liberties and rights the country was originally built on.

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

To encapsulate thursdays decision; The FCC decided that ISPs(internet service providers), needed not, have rules keeping them from blocking or changing the speed of online content, or prioritizing their providers internet content. The FCC made this move to veer away from the act of regulating the internet, according to CNN “In the absence of a firm ban on these actions, providers will be required to publicly disclose any instance of blocking, throttling or paid prioritization. It will then be evaluated based on whether or not the activity is anti-competitive.”(Fiegerman, 2017). The Federal Communications Commission also decided to move internet protection issues to The Federal Trade Commission.

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.

"The internet is a vast expansion that has come into its own in the last couple decades. Internet culture is ever evolving, and information is available to virtually anyone with a click of a mouse. This invention has revolutionized the format of society, in both positive and negative aspects. The saying “you can find anything on the internet” is not far off. While many internet users only use the internet for basics, such as Google and Youtube, there is a secret and much darker place known as the ‘dark web’ that is filled with vile/illegal imagery, videos, and products. For this reason I believe that it is the duty of the federal government to regulate the internet, to an extent.

Today the status quo about internet crime regulation seems to be perplexed. One part of the status quo held by the general public is that crime on the internet must be defeated to keep the public safe. Another part of this that people have is that the internet should be free of monitoring and regulations, in order to secure personal privacy. The problem with the first quo is that it is extremely difficult to end all forms of crime that occur on the web. This is due to the complexity and sheer mass of crimes which occur there. The unfathomable number of crimes committed on the web are difficult to regulate

The Internet is used by millions everyday. With so many people using one open platform, a question arises. Should the government regulate or leave it to the people? Both sides are supported by millions. The answer is simple, the Internet should be regulated due to user security, net neutrality, and data collecting.

This paper shall discuss the situations that have raised the need for the Internet regulations, and in particular, Internet content censorship. Then, it shall review the regulatory efforts worldwide, with respect to the local cultures and governmental systems. Also, technological tools for regulating the Internet contents shall be presented. The ethical discussion shall focus on the right to regulate the Internet content, in light of the implications this restriction may have on the

The ideal usage of the internet is to go on and browse anything we want. All the entertainment, social media, and news would be at our freedom to view. We would expect fast speeds and the freedom to explore each and every website. Little did we know, all of the internet was protected by a set of rules that prevented Internet Service Providers (ISPs) from taking our internet freedom away. These rules are known as Net Neutrality. Net Neutrality is expected when we use the internet, otherwise, it would not seem like the internet at all. We could begin to experience slower speeds with higher prices and there would be nothing we could do about it, unless we stop the repeal of Net Neutrality all together. Ajit Pai, an FCC chairman, encouraged the repeal of Net Neutrality. Now that the FCC has voted to repeal it, it is up to us to stop it. Preventing it can save jobs, businesses, and keep peace with the millions of citizens who want to protect Net Neutrality from getting repealed. It goes to show how important these rules mean to us Americans. We have our rights and freedom of the internet is one right we truly want to keep the government from changing. Net Neutrality preserves our rights to communicate freely online, and without it, internet users and small companies are exposed to slower internet speeds, paying more to use the internet, and discrimination of the internet.

There is a continuous monitoring over the Internet in the United States. This is the potential and propositional controversy over the privacy rights. This law is stated as the invasion of privacy, and it can be observed that this regulation is placed upon us for the context of limitation and a ban on certain websites. This is truly an example of a nanny state where one is being observed and is not free to surf and browse the internet (Broache, 2016). This primarily discusses the benefits of this law and the constraints and downsides of this law. Thus, this article delimits the potential of control over the internet for the so-called "Safe & Secure" browsing.