Net Neutrality
INTRO:
The principle of net neutrality, a subject currently causing much dispute in the United States, asserts that broadband Internet providers must treat all information on the Internet equally, without censoring or favoring different users, sources, services, content, or platforms; essentially, people who support net neutrality support an Internet without discrimination.
Since its inception, the Internet has rapidly changed how society functions by creating a new dynamic between businesses and consumers. Considering its unprecedented nature, new Internet legislation provides a unique opportunity for Americans to alter the role of all future technology in both the local community and on a national scale. For consumers and …show more content…
This reclassification exempted ISPs from the common carrier rules, allowing them to discriminate against consumers and content providers without intervention. Recently, the FCC, along with consumers, became concerned that ISPs were becoming too powerful. To preserve balance, the FCC constructed the Open Internet Order of 2010, which specifically ensured “transparency, no blocking, and no discrimination” (“Open Internet Order”). The Internet Service Providers disagreed with such legislation, so they challenged the FCC in court. As a result, the US Court of Appeals scrapped the rules against blocking and discrimination, leaving transparency as the only required guideline (Verizon v. Federal Communications Commission). Considering the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has yet to finish developing a system of net neutrality in the United States, the fate of the Internet is …show more content…
Analyzing it on a smaller scale, such as static, investment, or innovative, helps to focus on certain perspectives. The standard economic model of any market is focused on static issues. A static model of the Internet shows monopolies by the ISPs. Time Warner Cable, AT&T, Comcast, and their allies own over 75% of the Internet market (Cortade). Monopolies are caused by a lack of competition, which could be resolved by net neutrality. Currently, a small company run out of a basement gets the same treatment from broadband providers as a multi-billion dollar corporation. Without Net Neutrality, powerful companies would be able to purchase a “fast lane” that relieves congestion for them while pushing it onto their competitors, giving their products an unfair advantage. Investment models differ from their static counterparts by considering effects over a period of time, rather than at one point. ISPs invest in more powerful servers to improve service quality. By passing additional fees, such as fast lanes, onto application/content providers, ISPs are more likely to invest in the network infrastructure. The FCC supports this theory through empirical data collected during a recent experiment. In March 2008, the FCC auctioned off the “C block,” a server
INTRO:
The principle of net neutrality, a subject currently causing much dispute in the United States, asserts that broadband Internet providers must treat all information on the Internet equally, without censoring or favoring different users, sources, services, content, or platforms; essentially, people who support net neutrality support an Internet without discrimination.
Since its inception, the Internet has rapidly changed how society functions by creating a new dynamic between businesses and consumers. Considering its unprecedented nature, new Internet legislation provides a unique opportunity for Americans to alter the role of all future technology in both the local community and on a national scale. For consumers and …show more content…
This reclassification exempted ISPs from the common carrier rules, allowing them to discriminate against consumers and content providers without intervention. Recently, the FCC, along with consumers, became concerned that ISPs were becoming too powerful. To preserve balance, the FCC constructed the Open Internet Order of 2010, which specifically ensured “transparency, no blocking, and no discrimination” (“Open Internet Order”). The Internet Service Providers disagreed with such legislation, so they challenged the FCC in court. As a result, the US Court of Appeals scrapped the rules against blocking and discrimination, leaving transparency as the only required guideline (Verizon v. Federal Communications Commission). Considering the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has yet to finish developing a system of net neutrality in the United States, the fate of the Internet is …show more content…
Analyzing it on a smaller scale, such as static, investment, or innovative, helps to focus on certain perspectives. The standard economic model of any market is focused on static issues. A static model of the Internet shows monopolies by the ISPs. Time Warner Cable, AT&T, Comcast, and their allies own over 75% of the Internet market (Cortade). Monopolies are caused by a lack of competition, which could be resolved by net neutrality. Currently, a small company run out of a basement gets the same treatment from broadband providers as a multi-billion dollar corporation. Without Net Neutrality, powerful companies would be able to purchase a “fast lane” that relieves congestion for them while pushing it onto their competitors, giving their products an unfair advantage. Investment models differ from their static counterparts by considering effects over a period of time, rather than at one point. ISPs invest in more powerful servers to improve service quality. By passing additional fees, such as fast lanes, onto application/content providers, ISPs are more likely to invest in the network infrastructure. The FCC supports this theory through empirical data collected during a recent experiment. In March 2008, the FCC auctioned off the “C block,” a server