Net Neutrality: An Important Issue?

[Zinkovich]

For those unaware of what net neutrality is, I recommend you watch this video and go to the website that made it, like I just did: Free Movies & Documentaries - Save the Internet!

Now then, I would like to hear other perspectives on this issue from you guys, as I am new to this whole debate/issue- is net neutrality a big deal? Do companies have no right to these pipes, considering their origin? What could we, as citizens, do if they were to succeed in segregating the internet into seperate "lanes"?

Most of all, is it only a matter of time before the internet becomes completely commercialised in the same sense television and radio has been?

[Heather]

For those unaware of what net neutrality is, I recommend you watch this video and go to the website that made it, like I just did: Free Movies & Documentaries - Save the Internet!

I myself was unaware of this, thanking you for sharing that video and bring up the subject.

Now then, I would like to hear other perspectives on this issue from you guys, as I am new to this whole debate/issue- is net neutrality a big deal? Do companies have no right to these pipes, considering their origin? What could we, as citizens, do if they were to succeed in segregating the internet into seperate "lanes"?

Yes, this seems like a big deal to me. Essentially, major ISP's are proposing that they limit the rights and freedoms of the American citizen for the sake of expanding their pocket book.

As individual citizens, we could choose to simply not use the services of ISP's who would propose such a thing. One could "unplug" their service from their ISP who is attempting or proposing to do such and send the ISP a letter letting them know why you are switching services. Hit them in the wallet (which is obviously what they care about, certainly not their consumer) and let them know why. But, obviously, this only works if a larger majority of people were to take the time and effort to do this.

[Slevin57]

I think it's an issue we need to watch closely. This is the kind of thing that gets slipped in a bill without anyone knowing and suddenly we are being charged usage rates.

The AT&T CEO has already said he see's no reason why people shouldn't be paying to use the internet that goes over AT&T's pipeline.

From a business prospective. I have to agree. Companies are missing out on a multi-billion dollar business.

Could you imagine being charged more to use websites that are farther away from your house?

But from my true perspective, I think its very important the internet stay neutral and unregulated. I know there are allot of horrible things on the internet but right now I feel the benefits of a free internet outweigh the costs.

[tman_ndsu08]

Here's a much better site to learn about the concept: Network neutrality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


In short, any legislation that limits the ability of a company to provide a service that its customers demand is absolutely appalling and should be shot down as quickly as possible.


Any service provider should have the ability to prioritize its services as it sees fit. If the market rejects their prioritization, they go out of business and that's the end of them. Done and done.

Government legislation only ever gets in the way.

[grandpa]

If we want, we can assume that the government ought to provide monopoly status towards broadcasters (which it does) and that this is somehow part of a "free market" (that mythical thing I keep hearing about but remarkably haven't seen).

When the RIAA uses the government to try influence what people can and cannot hear on the internet, we could argue that they are simply trying to "prioritize its services as it sees fit" by suing people who somehow threaten the music industry as a whole.

But I personally think the airwaves could be managed a better way--not the FCC way, not the Time Warner way, but in a non-capitalist, non-state way.

Grandpa h.

[tman_ndsu08]

The RIAA does not provide a service. They sell goods.

[Jack]

The RIAA itself sells nothing.

The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) is the trade group that represents the U.S. recording industry. Its mission is to foster a business and legal climate that supports and promotes our members' creative and financial vitality.

In support of this mission, the RIAA works to protect intellectual property rights worldwide and the First Amendment rights of artists; conduct consumer industry and technical research; and monitor and review - - state and federal laws, regulations and policies. The RIAA also certifies Gold®, Platinum®, Multi-Platinum™, and Diamond® sales awards, and recently launched Los Premios De Oro y Platino™, a new award celebrating Latin music sales.

It's an association of record companies. It doesn't sell product any more than the NRA sells guns.

[Milton Bradley]

I had a great thread about this subject with links to PBS's NOW. ( I think it's in the Politics Folder. )


I don't think this topic illicited a lot of responses then either.


Truth is, United Statians don't seem very incined to investigate their own disenfranchisment.

[tman_ndsu08]

What do you mean by that?


Shouldn't a service provider be allowed to prioritize which services it fulfills first?

[rez]

Wow, only 8 posts a year ago. What a shame.

Time Warner Cable tries metering Internet use: Financial News - Yahoo! Finance

[Jack]

Some of those who helped develop the internet have posted the following on net neutrality:

15 October 2009

Honorable Julius Genachowski
Chairman, Federal Communications Commission
Washington, DC
Via email

Dear Mr. Chairman:

We appreciate the opportunity to send you this letter. As individuals who have worked on the Internet and its predecessors continuously beginning in the late 1960s, we are very concerned that access to the Internet be both open and robust. We are very pleased by your recent proposal to initiate a proceeding for the consideration of safeguards to that end.

In particular, we believe that your network neutrality proposal's key principles of "nondiscrimination" and "transparency" are necessary components of a pro-innovation public policy agenda for this nation. This initiative is both timely and necessary, and we look forward to a data-driven, on-the-record proceeding to consider all of the various options.

We understand that your proposal, while not even yet part of a public proceeding, already is meeting with strong and vocal resistance from some of the organizations that the American public depends upon for broadband access to the Internet. As you know, the debate on this topic has been lengthy, and many parties opposing the concept have systematically mischaracterized the views of those who endorse and support your position.

We believe that the existing Internet access landscape in the U.S. provides inadequate choices to discipline the market through facilities-based competition alone. Your network neutrality proposals will help protect U.S. Internet users' choices for and freedom to access all available Internet services, worldwide, while still providing for responsible network operation and management practices, including appropriate privacy-preserving protections against denial of service and other attacks.

One persistent myth is that "network neutrality" somehow requires that all packets be treated identically, that no prioritization or quality of service is permitted under such a framework, and that network neutrality would forbid charging users higher fees for faster speed circuits. To the contrary, we believe such features are permitted within a "network neutral" framework, so long they are not applied in an anti-competitive fashion.

We believe that the vast numbers of innovative Internet applications over the last decade are a direct consequence of an open and freely accessible Internet. Many now-successful companies have deployed their services on the Internet without the need to negotiate special arrangements with Internet Service Providers, and it's crucial that future innovators have the same opportunity. We are advocates for "permissionless innovation" that does not impede entrepreneurial enterprise.

We commend your initiative to protect and maintain the Internet's unique openness, and support the FCC process for considering the adoption of your proposed nondiscrimination and transparency principles.

Respectfully,

Vinton G. Cerf, Internet Pioneer
Stephen D. Crocker, Internet Pioneer
David P. Reed, Internet Pioneer
Lauren Weinstein, Internet Pioneer
Daniel Lynch, Internet Pioneer

http://www.vortex.com/FCC-Net-Neutrality-Letter.pdf

[Muckraker]

From a business prospective. I have to agree. Companies are missing out on a multi-billion dollar business.

Missing out? In my opinion, they already cashed in. Remember the days of the 1200baud modems? I used to pay $2-$3 a minute for Prodigy internet service back then. And that was in early 1990's dollars!

I enjoyed going to chat rooms back then and it would not be unusual for me to rack up a $600 monthly bill for the blazing fast 1200baud phone connection.

ISP's have gouged customers for years and now they are simply in the back-end of their product cycle, just like many other technology companies.

If they want to break into new sources of revenue then they have the burden of coming up with a new "must have" product that they can gouge us for.