So, now that we know the situation that brought about the issue of network neutrality and legislation deal with it, we want to find out the positives and negatives behind the issue so that you, as an individual, can decide which side you want to take. As with all the issues I will deal with on this site (unless clearly stated)I will be totally unbiased and show both sides equally. If any inequality exists, it will be that I am starting with the positive sides of network neutrality. Sorry.
Positives:
1. With network neutrality legislation, internet sevice providers(ISPs), e.g. AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon, won't be able to discriminate against certain internet content. Right now, the internet is open. You can watch videos, listen to music and send emails on the same internet connection. Some may pay more money for the faster connection, but within those brackets, all content moves at the same speed. With network neutrality, companies won't be able to charge you more for watching Hulu than using email.
2. With network neutrality legislation, cable companies and ISPs won't be able to charge companies or websites a toll for access to their networks. This would create and environment where companies could block competitor web sites and services, or even carve out faster bandwidth for their own services (Comcast is currently looking to purchase NBC. If that happens and there are no net neutrality laws, Comcast COULD block ABC and CBS video and only allow NBC video to their customers. But that is a BIG Could!). In addition to blocking services, it might be that smaller individuals with websites or small companies with innovative web services wouldn't be able to pay these "fees" and that would cripple innovation and public access on the internet. The days of having your own, free blog would be over, in theory.
Those are the 2 main arguments for having network neutrality legislation in place. Major advocates for network neutrality are consumer advocates and internet application companies like Yahoo!, Ebay, Amazon and (for the most part) Google. Even Cogent Communications, an international Internet Service Provider is in favor of network neutrality.
Negatives:
1. Some companies, such as Verizon, have argued that they will have no incentive to make investments in high speed networks if they are unable to charge access fees to companies wishing to use those services. With the money made by charging these fees, ISPs say that they will be able to invest more in broadband access to more areas of the country.
2. Some argue that the internet is ALREADY not neutral, as large companies can have better performance by paying for better machines to run their applications from. If prices were to DROP for lower levels of access, internet usage would be MORE neutral for companies wishing to use those lower tiers of service.
3. A main argument by ISPs is that certain companies and services use more bandwidth than others and should pay more. Websites like Hulu and Youtube, and other websites that offer free video content, use a lot of bandwidth, on small networks, can run slow as well as cause other services to slow.
----------------------------------------------------
Some people view network neutrality as a non-issue. They say that writing legislation would put the government in charge of something that isn't a problem. Many ISPs and cable companies say that if they DID start tiered services, and people didn't like it, people would simply stop using their service and go to another company. Thus the network neutrality issue would be solved without government intervention. Others say that without government regulation, ALL internet service providers will move to a tiered service plan and there won't BE other options for consumers. Thus the internet will no longer be neutral and there will be nothing to be done to take us back to the era we are in now.
Network neutrality is a complex issue that has many interesting, exciting and scary points on each side. Hopefully, ISPs, internet companies, government and citizens can come together to create legislation that, while stoking the flames of innovation and creating a healthy environment for independent use, can allow incentives for creating a larger, more robust network for the country's use.
Because, really, the internet isn't going anywhere.
No comments:
Post a Comment