The Pros And Cons Of Paid Prioritization

The internet: a place to express yourself, an innovative opportunity to buy and sell products, an opportunity for small business to grow; and a place for exploitation? Many believe that the current state of the internet is perfect: and that regulation would only harm this perfect world. However, the internet is not perfect, and a lack of government involvement has led to: the absence of net neutrality, an increase in criminal activity, and the formation of monopolistic organizations that harms every internet user. In order to provide a safer internet, preserve net neutrality, and to uphold anti-trust laws, the U.S. Government must regulate the internet. According to Go-Gulf.com, the U.S. has the second highest cybercrime rate in the world …show more content…
Rather, these laws would address Paid Prioritization, a system “where a broadband provider engages in “vertical prioritization” by favoring its own content” (Aid). Paid Prioritization is what internet Service providers claim is their “Free Speech” but, paid prioritization limits net neutrality; so it cannot be classified as “Free Speech” if it since it hinders the speech of others. To maintain net neutrality, the U.S. government must ban paid prioritization. The associated press reporter for government policy Anne Flaherty presents how paid prioritization affects users, “If Comcast and Time Warner … have the ability to manage and manipulate Internet speeds and access to benefit their own bottom line, they will be able to filter content and alter the user experience”. One of the main ideas behind net neutrality is having a service provider that does not block or discriminate any content. However, as paid prioritization is currently legal, it allows providers to block and discriminate against competitors ' content. One example is Verizon v. FCC (2014), raised by FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler. Verizon, a broadband provider which also owns a sports network, gave a commercial advantage to its own network over a competing sports network that was using …show more content…
government passed the Sherman Anti-Trust Act in 1890, it became illegal for companies to gain unfair advantages that limit competition and prevented innovation. However, internet companies currently have a loophole that gives them an unfair advantage, which makes it harder for regular business to compete. To preserve the Sherman Anti-trust Act and to insure that all companies have an equal opportunity, online Companies need to have the same regulations as regular businesses - by doing so there will be a level playing field that sparks competition and innovation. Megan McArdle, Economics and finance expert for Bloomberg, explains, “Monopolists often operate in markets where there are great returns to scale”. Internet company’s returns to scale are much higher than regular businesses; McArdle’s words don’t alone prove that limited government regulations gave online businesses higher returns to scale and made an unfair advantage. However, Uber’s tax structure, C.V.–B.V., or double dip, shows how limited internet regulations give them an unfair advantage. This loophole allows the Delaware based company to avoid paying the U.S. corporate tax rate of 35 percent. Ubers online status allows them to claim profits anywhere; so Uber claims their profits in Bermuda, where the corporate tax rate is 0 percent, this gives them higher returns to scale (O 'Keefe and Jones). Nearly all major online companies use this loophole, higher profits allow online businesses to