Disagree

by Michael Hlatky

Created on: July 08, 2010   Last Updated: July 09, 2010

The article “FCC’s Net Neutrality Plan Draws Fast Fire” found on PcWorld.com highlights the recent developments on both sides of the issue of net neutrality. It states that FCC chairman, Julius Genachowski, announced that the FCC plans to add two more principles to the four principles of net neutrality that were adapted in 2005. The FCC plans to prevent broadband carriers to limiting access to things that carriers might block or change extra for, such as, video streaming and legal file sharing. However, not everyone is in favor of adding these two new principles. David L. Cohen, the executive vice president for Comcast, argues that the net neutrality debate has been going on for years and that the Internet has grown greatly during that time. Other people argue that prices may be forced to increase or at least have a bandwidth cap, because bandwidth is not unlimited. Although Genachowski did not talk about specifics for mobile providers, he noted that he wanted the FCC to, “analyze fully the implications of the principles for mobile network architectures and practice”. Many Republicans argue that, “government intervention would stifle innovation”. The next move for the FCC, as told by Genachowski, is to receive feedback from the public on their opinion about net neutrality. As a result of this, the FCC has set up a website, OpenInternet.gov, where anyone can input their opinion (Paul, 2009).

Network Neutrality, commonly known as net neutrality, has several components to its definition. Dictionary.com defines net neutrality as, “The principle that basic Internet protocols should be non-discriminatory, especially that content providers should get equal treatment from internet operators” (Dictionary.com 2005). This means that internet service providers would be prevented from blocking, speeding up, or slowing down Web content based on its source, ownership, or destination (SavetheInternet.com). The organizations and people that are for net neutrality include: the FCC, President Barak Obama, Google, Microsoft, the general public (internet users), MoveOn.org, and the Consumer Electronic Association. Organizations and people that are against net neutrality include: Internet Service Providers (AT+T, Comcast, Verizon), the “Father of the Internet” Robert Kahn, and Senator John McCain. Within the past few years, network neutrality has become a prominent issue in the telecommunication industry with important organizations like the FCC, Google, and Microsoft debating the issue against large Internet Service Providers like AT+T, Comcast, and Verizon.

The recent ballooning of the issue of network neutrality is due to the Brand X Supreme Court decision in 2005. On June 27, 2005, the Supreme Court made a decision in the case of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association v. Brand x Internet Services. The Supreme Court declared that a cable Internet provider is an “information service,” and not a “telecommunications service”. It also declared that the FCC has the authority to make the decision. Ultimately, the FCC decided that cable companies were information services and did have to allow their competitors access to their faster connections (National Cable & Communications Association v. Brand X Internet Services 2005). Using a cable modem for Internet access had been classified as an information service and subject to common carrier regulations. On the other hand, DSL, because it was across a phone network, was classified as a telecommunications service, and therefore subject to common carrier regulations. A common carrier is a business that offers its services to the general public under license or authority provided by a regulatory body. The business must provide its service to the general public without discrimination for the “public convenience and necessity”. Even after this ruling, on August 5, 2005, the FCC reclassified DSL services as information services instead of being telecommunications services. They also replaced the common carrier requirements with four net neutrality principles. The FCC came out with the following statement:

The Federal Communications Commission today adopted a policy statement that outlines four principles to encourage broadband deployment and preserve and promote the open and interconnected nature of public Internet: (1) consumers are entitled to access the lawful Internet content of their choice; (2) consumers are entitled to run applications and services of their choice, subject to the needs of law enforcement; (3) consumers are entitled to connect their choice of legal devices that do not harm the network; and (4) consumers are entitled to competition among network providers, application and service providers, and content providers. Although the Commission did not adopt rules in this regard, it will incorporate these principles into its ongoing policymaking activities. All of these principles are subject to reasonable network management (FCC 2005).

That statement has sparked debate whether or not Internet Service Providers would be able to offer higher paying customers a faster and more reliable connection. Internet Service Providers have also wanted to charge content providers so that internet users will be more directed toward those sites or services. This would lead to something called tiered Internet, which is the main reason the issue of net neutrality has grown in the past few years, to prevent this from happening. Tiered Internet would allow telecommunications providers with the ability to divide up traffic over different tiers. Customers would have to pay more to be in the higher tier which would have faster and more reliable service and possibly access to different applications.  This heated debate, of whether ISPs should be able to charge content providers or tier the Internet, has two sides offering arguments both for and against net neutrality.

The organizations that are for net neutrality include online companies (content providers), the FCC, and SavetheInternet.com, which is a collection of hundreds of groups which are “concerned about maintaining a free and open Internet” (SavetheInternet.com). The standards for net neutrality today was set by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). As stated on its website, the FCC is, “charged with regulating interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite and cable” (FCC.gov). On September 21, 2009, Chairman Julius Genachowski announced that the FCC would “prevent broadband carriers from limiting your access to high speed Internet for things like Internet-based voice calls, video streaming, and legal file sharing (that carriers might wish to block or at least charge extra for)” (PC World 2009). In addition to the 4 principles established in 2005, he proposed to add 2 more principles. These two proposed principles are the following:

5. Broadband providers cannot block or degrade lawful traffic over their networks, favor certain content or applications over others and cannot "disfavor an Internet service just because it competes with a similar service offered by that broadband provider."

6. Broadband providers must be transparent about the service they are providing and how they are running their networks (PC World 2009).

Another key player in the push for net neutrality is Google, the search engine giant, and according to Alexa.com (2009), the most viewed website on the Internet. Google has said this about wanting net neutrality, “if broadband providers were to leverage their unilateral control over consumers' connections and offer collocation or caching services in an anti-competitive fashion, that would threaten the open Internet and the innovation it enables” (Whitt 2008). Obviously, Google would not want to get into a bidding war with Yahoo! or Bing so that ISPs will direct internet users to their websites or services. Also, with the recent develop of Google Voice, Google would not want ISPs to prevent customers from accessing it, or being charged to offer it to consumers. They are concerned about net neutrality because they would want to know that their future developments or acquisitions would not be discriminated against. Tim Berners-Lee, the man credited with the invention of the World Wide Web, reiterates Google’s statement. He says that, “It is of the utmost importance that, if I connect to the Internet, and you connect to the Internet, that we can then run any Internet application we want, without discrimination as to who we are or what we are doing” (Berners-Lee 2006). SavetheInternet.com, which is a net neutrality support group, boasts hundreds of groups that support its cause. It accuses telephone and cable companies of wanting to be, “Internet gatekeepers, deciding which Web sites go fast or slow and which won't load at all” (SavetheInternet.com).

One of the common arguments in support of net neutrality is the fact that the Internet has been based upon allowing anyone to create content without having to pay more for ISPs to direct traffic or provide reliable service to their content. If the net neutrality legislation was not adapted, this would deter entrepreneurs and small companies from coming up with new ideas for the Internet or providing more content. They would have to compete with companies like Skype and YouTube for reliable service of their content. And, small companies and entrepreneurs would not be able to pay as much money as these web giants. Tim Berners-Lee said that when he invented the World Wide Web, “It allowed new Internet applications to be introduced and to evolve independently” (Berners-Lee 2006). Net neutrality supporters argue that this would not be possible if the net neutrality legislation proposed by the FCC was not adapted.

The organizations and individuals who are against net neutrality include Internet Service Providers like Verizon, Comcast, and AT+T, Senator John McCain, and “Father of the Internet” Robert Kahn. Internet Service Providers argue against net neutrality and propose that the Internet should be tiered. As stated above, this means that customers would have to pay more to be on the higher tier and have a more reliable service and access to applications like Skype and VoIP. On October 22, 2009, Senator John McCain proposed legislation called the Internet Freedom Act of 2009 that would prevent the FCC from having rules that would regulate the Internet. McCain argues that the proposed net neutrality rules would be a form of “government takeover” of the Internet and that they would also prevent innovation from individuals (Gross 2009). “Father of the Internet”, Robert Kahn, also agrees with McCain in the fact that if passed, net neutrality would deter innovation. He claims that net neutrality is a slogan and that it would, “freeze innovation in the core of the Internet” (Orlowski 2007).

Like John McCain and Robert Kahn have said, people against net neutrality believe that net neutrality would prevent innovation. Opponents of net neutrality argue that it is vital for the future of the Internet to maximize bandwidth capacity. Telecommunications providers argue that there should be a tiered Internet so that they can charge customers for extra services or more reliable service. They say that with this extra revenue, they could put it toward making broadband accessible to more consumers. Another argument used by people against net neutrality is the fact that there is simply not enough bandwidth available.  SBC Communications has suggested that should be able to charge companies for using a substantial amount of bandwidth. Bret Swanson of the Wallstreet Journal says that YouTube streams as much data in three months as the world's radio, cable and broadcast television channels stream in one year (Swanson 2007).

In conclusion, the recent ballooning of net neutrality is to stop tiered Internet and to stop ISPs from charging content providers. The current legislation for net neutrality includes four principles which, “encourage broadband deployment and preserve and promote the open and interconnected nature of public Internet” (FCC 2005). The FCC has proposed two more principles in addition to those four that would not allow for a tiered Internet. Proponents of net neutrality include the FCC and web companies like Google and Skype. They do not want to pay ISPs to have reliable service for their sites and applications. The opponents of these two additional proposed principles include Internet Service Providers, like Comcast and Verizon, and Senator John McCain, who has proposed legislation of his own. Judging from my research, I believe that the two additional principles suggested by the FCC will be adapted in the near future. I think that Internet Service Providers are against net neutrality because they are not going to be able to charge customers extra. Although they claim they will use the additional revenue to expand the possibilities of broadband, they could easily use the money for whatever they want. I also believe that Republicans like John McCain are opposed to net neutrality simply because it was proposed by Democratics, and that is how politics works. Net neutrality would be good for the general public and that is why I believe that these principles will be adapted in the near future.

Learn more about this author, Michael Hlatky.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.