The Battle for Net Neutrality
Last January 14, 2014, a Washington D.C. court ruled out the Federal Communications Commission’s regulation on Open Internet or more popularly known as net neutrality. The decision on the case sparked debate between those fighting for net neutrality and the companies who want to take advantage of the internet’s popularity. This was a victory for Verizon, an Internet Service Provider, and other companies like it. In her article, Net Not Free for All, Aviva Rutkin writes that “information will no longer be free, but governed by the whims of big business” (Rutkin 24). She is right. These big companies will be able to make more profit by charging for faster service. And, on the other hand, the verdict is considered a loss for internet-based companies, especially start-up businesses, who will have to pay to keep the quality of their products up or it will lead to decline in customers therefore losing more profit. Sooner or later, this power play will affect the regular internet users who will end up paying more to use specific services that will require high-speed connection. Net neutrality contributed to the world’s modernization, protected internet users’ rights and kept business opportunities equal for both small and big companies therefore it is important that it is re-established and maintained.
The principle of net neutrality has been present since the internet was invented in 1989. In a video posted on The Guardian, Tim Berners-Lee, creator of the World Wide Web, spoke about how he had created the internet to be an “open, neutral system” (“World”). And, with that in mind, the Federal Communications Commission adopted the Open Internet Rules. This was set to ensure that the World Wide Web “remains a...
... middle of paper ...
...urn, users will continue to enjoy its vast services.
Works Cited
Berners-Lee, Tim. "World Wide Web Inventor Tim Berners-Lee: 'Establish Web's Principles of Openness and Privacy'" Interview. The Guardian. N.p., 12 Mar. 2014. Web. 29 Mar. 2014.
Progue, David. “The Great Net Debate.” Scientific American 310.4 (2014): 36. Academic Search Complete. Web. 29 Mar. 2014.
Rutkin, Aviva. “Net Not Free For All”. New Scientist 221.2954 (2014): 24. Academic Search Complete. Web. 29 Mar. 2014.
"The Open Internet." Federal Communications Commission. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Mar. 2014.
Verizon v. Federal Communications Commission. US Court of Appeals D.C. Circuit Website. United States Court of Appeals For The District of Columbia. 14 Jan. 2014. Web. 29 Mar. 2014.
Wyatt, Edward and Cohen, Noam. "Comcast and Netflix Reach Deal on Service." The New York Times 24 February 2014: B1. Print.
The emergence of the Internet and the World Wide Web brought upon a medium of communication with a range of opportunities for the world. However, this medium is, in due course, subject to the control of a few major companies. The enigma of information flow is the central concern of net neutrality. Consumers, competition and network owners would benefit directly from the regulation of network neutrality because it would provide a positive impact to those parties as well as provide equality.
Schmidt, E. E., & Cohen, J. (2014, March 11). The Future of Internet Freedom. Retrieved September 26, 2017, from
A recent and hotly debated topic among businesses, politicians, and internet users in the United States is that of net neutrality. With the rise of the internet over the past few decades, laws and regulations have struggled to keep up with the ever changing environment. As such, the problem of whether net neutrality should be enforced, and to what extent, has been a dividing issue. This problem has come into the public’s attention recently due to infringements and controversy surrounding policies by Internet Service Providers (ISPs). In the following paragraphs, I plan to first define the concept of net neutrality, related topics which are crucial for an informed ethical discussion of the topic, and also related cases in which net neutrality
Tim Wu is known as “the father of Net Neutrality” for first coining the term “Net Neutrality”. He is a professor at Columbia Law School and the director of the Poliak Center at Columbia Journalism School. He commonly talks about other topics such as copyright, private power and free speech. Wu believes that net neutrality can prevent companies and carriers to offer “special” treatment to one specific provider instead of another. According to Wu, Net Neutrality benefits anyone in some way and believes that Internet transparency is critical because carriers fail to tell what services they provide for the user. At the core of Net neutrality, there is a free speech principle. It allows speakers and innovators to reach people that they would not
ISPs, including ATT, express concern about the proposed rules of Net Neutrality that would prohibit it from slowing competitors’ web traffic or accessing content (Shatz). By not allowing the ability for ISPs to regulate its network and the bandwidth that moves through it, it can cause a variety of problems that un...
...s article “Ma Bell’s Revenge: The battle for Network Neutrality” shows us in a just a few of the hundreds of arguments which have been brought up over the proposal of network neutrality. Network neutrality essentially means that all data gets treated the same by an ISP or service, whether it be an incoming email or a gigantic video file, it’s is based on the principle that Internet users should be in control of what content they view and what applications they choose to use on the Internet. The Internet has operated according to this neutrality principle since its earliest days. In other words, net neutrality is about equal access to the Internet in terms of overall speed. Just as telephone companies are not permitted to tell consumers who they can call or what they can say, broadband carriers should not be allowed to use their market power to control activity online.
Berners-Lee’s creation of the world wide web has allowed millions upon millions of people to connect and share their ideas in a way that is instantaneous and free. Accessing the internet itself costs no money, it’s acquiring the connection that often costs money. The companies that provide this connection are called ISPs or internet service providers, unfortunately many cities only offer a few options when it comes to ISPs, this lack of competition in the market often creates a monopoly or duopoly where one or two companies provide internet for an entire city, having complete control over the prices they offer and the services they allow. The Obama era net neutrality rules which were repealed by Trump’s FCC “required internet service providers to offer equal access to all web content without charging consumers for higher-quality delivery or giving preferential treatment to certain websites” (Collins), without these regulations service providers can slow service for companies and consumers that don’t pay premiums, creating a discriminatory environment where companies might interfere with comments that make them look bad, block certain applications that they compete with, remove access to union sites during a labor issue, or increase their own profit by making developers pay more to avoid having their data
Federal Communications Commission has (Cano 712). This court case set that companies must be classified as common carriers if the FCC wants to prevent unreasonable discrimination and blocking websites that are lawful and competing with the company’s own website. So to prevent this from happening the FCC must reclassify again. Net neutrality is necessary to consumers because of how much the internet is needed in today’s society. Without the equal access to the internet, people may be unable to complete certain tasks which their jobs or government requires of them. This leaves the poor at a disadvantage as they may be unable to pay for increased prices. It also makes it increasingly more difficult for them to go about their lives as the internet has become woven into the fabric of our society. The principles of net neutrality need to be upheld in order to protect the freedoms of the users that are defined by the FCC. People should not have to go through unreasonable barriers in order to access content that is
In this article, journalist Tali Arbel from the Associated Press explains the implications of the recent decision on Net Neutrality. In December, the FCC voted to overturn Net Neutrality, a set of laws dictating that all data on the internet must be treated equally by internet providers. Arbel goes on to say that without Net Neutrality protections, internet providers such as Verizon, Comcast, and the like will have the power to charge services like Amazon more for faster access to customers, as well as slow down or block content they disagree with. Arbel then lists the responses of the largest internet providers when asked whether they would consider using this new power. According to Arbel, “Three said they had ‘no plans’ for paid prioritization,
The concept of Net Neutrality is one with large amounts of controversy behind it. The idea that the internet would give certain types of traffic priority, such as web page requests over video streaming, is necessary to support network growth while others stake the claim that giving this priority undermines the established internet principles of free speech and non-exclusivity. The Federal Communications Commission has put policies in place to strive to a more neutral internet, one such policy being the Open Internet Order. There is heavy debate over whether the internet should be neutral and around whether or not there should be regulations in place to dictate what contents can travel faster than others can. We will be working for Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) in support of net neutrality. Markey argues that net neutrality law is the “Declaration of Independence for the Internet,” where restrictions set on certain types of content on the internet do not limit freedom of expression.
The creation of the internet has truly changed the world in drastic ways. However, his change is directly influenced by huge companies that provide data. Net neutrality is the principle that all internet data providers should treat data the same and not discriminate against a certain person, website or company. Under these rules, internet providers can’t block, censor, or slow down certain data. Recently though, many companies have been fighting the repeal of net neutrality. I believe that net neutrality is important for the stability of the internet and the companies that rely heavily on the internet to spread their ideas, products and information.
Why should we be worried about the open internet? In the early 1990’s modern internet was introduced. After the increase in traffic flow (internet use) many large IPS (Internet Service Providers) were caught slowing data from popular websites to thousands of US businesses and residential customers in dozens of cities across the country. As a result, the Obama administration insisted on new Net Neutrality rules, meaning IPS’s could not block different websites or apps, slowing of services, or no discrimination amongst companies, which is causing many debates and concerns. Net Neutrality is the guiding principles for an open internet. The freedom of the web is in danger, and as the consumers we must preserve the freedom of the open internet. Substantial Internet Service Suppliers are attempting to hinder the internet and raise charges for Americans to use the web and only the American consumers can restrict them from having complete control. Without net neutrality the open internet could fall into the
Net neutrality is the basic principle that “the government who is in charge should oblige all of the internet service providers to always and equally treat all the data that is being sent around the web and to not discriminate against any type of user or company. This means that internet service providers cannot block or slow down in any way websites or any online content.” (Gilroy 1). The main issue that will be talked about in this essay is the fact the
On any given day in 2015, you would be hard-pressed to walk into a room at random in America without encountering a Smart Phone. There is hardly a library left that does not feature a quiet chorus of clicking keyboards from the laptops within. We are, in essence, permanently plugged in to the Great and Powerful Internet, and we rely on service providers (ISP’s) to provide us with this now-important resource. Lately, though, getting Internet is becoming less and less simple as folks debate the enforcement of Internet— or “net”— neutrality in the United States. There are a lot of inflated egos arguing back and forth on the subject, and the phrase “net neutrality” is becoming widely recognized amongst every day Internet users. But how many of these people actually get what is going on, here? What is net neutrality, and why are household net surfers and economists alike getting
Gould, Carol C. (ed.) (1989). The Information Web: Ethical and Social Implications of Computer Networking. (Boulder, Colorado : Westview Press).