Net Neutrality

Imagine this: you're conducting online research for an assignment. You find the website of a relevant organization but notice that the page is not loading. You refresh it multiple times, but it is exceptionally slow, and you have to give up.

Later, you do some digging and discover that the head of your Internet company politically disagrees with that particular organization, and the company purposefully slowed down the website's connection!

This is an example of what can happen without net neutrality. In this explanation, we will be exploring the concept and debates around net neutrality, including:

• The definition of net neutrality
• How net neutrality is enforced
• The development of net neutrality in the USA
• The pros and cons of net neutrality
• Net neutrality and privacy
• Net neutrality and controversy

Let's start simply with a definition of net neutrality.

Net Neutrality: Definition

First things first, what is the definition of net neutrality?

According to the concept of "net neutrality," all websites, applications, and materials must be accessible at the same speed and on the same terms, without any content being blocked or given priority by an internet service provider (ISP).

Whether a user connects to Netflix, the Internet Archive, or an unknown blog, their ISP must treat them all equally under net neutrality.

The Importance of Net Neutrality

Without net neutrality, an ISP can choose and restrict what users are exposed to, slow down access speeds, or block certain content entirely. It can also make special agreements with businesses to provide them with faster network access or speeds.

Therefore, net neutrality can significantly affect our experience of the Internet and access to information and is a much-debated issue that is still evolving today.

Fig. 1 - Net neutrality contributes to the experience of a free and equal internet.

Net Neutrality Rules

So, what are the rules of net neutrality? How is it enforced?

ISPs in the US are regulated by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The level of regulation of ISPs, including whether they must adhere to net neutrality, is decided based on how internet services are classified.

The FCC has categorized the internet as either Title I "information services" or Title II "common carrier services".

• If the internet is under the banner of "information services", the FCC cannot restrict or control ISPs in any significant way, and so cannot enforce net neutrality.

• If the internet falls under "common carrier services", the FCC would have the power to regulate ISPs and enforce net neutrality.

The Development of Net Neutrality in the USA

The US Congress imposed a ban on taxing internet business transactions in the Internet Tax Freedom Act of 1998. However, it was not until years later that what we know as net neutrality was established.

Let's look at the development of net neutrality in the USA to understand how it has evolved:

• Around 2003, when major telephone conglomerates realized that making phone calls via the internet had a bright future, they started keeping an eye on proposed legislation to secure the deregulation of online content. This is when the net neutrality movement was born.

• The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) started promoting net neutrality in 2005 by forbidding ISPs from throttling users' access to the internet or stopping them from connecting using their preferred devices.

• In the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, passed by the US Congress in 2009, aspects of net neutrality and open access were included to increase internet accessibility for underserved areas. The legislation did not, however, have a substantial impact on subsequent net neutrality laws or precedents.

• The Open Internet Order, which established two classes of internet access—one for fixed-line providers and another for the wireless internet—was passed by the FCC in 2010. The injunction ran into opposition, including a lawsuit Verizon filed in 2011.

• The FCC was denied the right to apply net neutrality regulations on services that are not "common carriers" by a court in 2014.

• ISPs were then reclassified as "common carrier services" under a new Open Internet Order that the FCC released in 2015, giving them full ability to uphold net neutrality.

• However, in 2017, with the appointment of an anti-net neutrality head of the FCC by then-President Donald Trump, many earlier net neutrality decisions were overturned by the FCC, categorizing internet services as "information services".

• A federal appeals court concluded in 2019 that the FCC can classify ISPs as Title I or II but cannot prevent the state or local government from enforcing net neutrality laws. Subsequently, such laws were passed in numerous states, including California, Oregon, and Washington.

Net Neutrality: Pros and Cons

Net neutrality is central to the national discussion over internet access and the digital divide. Below, we have examined the pros and cons of net neutrality.

Pros of Net Neutrality

Supporters argue that companies that provide internet service, like those that provide electricity and water, should be classified as "common carriers". This means they should be barred from discriminating based on the client or nature of the commodities.

With these legislative safeguards, proponents of net neutrality argue, all data will be treated equally, and the internet will not be split into "fast" and "slow" lanes.

Conflict theorists would contend that the above would prevent larger businesses (like Amazon) from simply paying ISPs more for speedier services. If they could do this, they would reduce their competitive advantage and evening the playing field with smaller, local rivals.

Cons of Net Neutrality

The opposing viewpoint contends that classifying internet service providers as "common carriers" would be an excessive regulatory burden by the government. They also argue it would restrict the capacity of internet and telecommunications firms to make a profit, as well as discourage economic growth and innovation.

Functionalist theorists would argue that without the revenue that comes with offering differently priced service tiers, businesses would not put money into enhancing their internet offerings or extending those offerings to underserved regions.

Fig. 2 - Some oppose net neutrality because it would reduce the profits of ISPs.

Net Neutrality and Privacy

Although the U.S. Constitution does not expressly grant citizens the right to privacy, the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unjustified searches is frequently interpreted to grant that right. Therefore, there should be a general rule that no one outside our social circles, not even law enforcement, should monitor what we do in public. When it comes to net neutrality and privacy, this is what net neutrality applies to the internet.

Net neutrality protects privacy in the sense that an open, unregulated internet is one in which users are free to choose the software, services, and hardware they want to use. There is no outside interference, and ISPS must adhere to privacy regulations.

With no net neutrality laws, ISPs are free to not only monitor, but restrict people's activities on the internet. They can track people's rates of online activity and may charge users to access certain content, thereby obtaining private and identifying information.

On the other hand, some have raised concerns about the fact that impartiality towards all information means that everyone can access private, harmful, and/or dangerous content, which is difficult to eliminate (for example, in the case of "revenge porn").

Net Neutrality Controversy

The idea of net neutrality is divisive and has undergone a wild transformation. The main points of contention in this discussion are how best to regulate the internet and whether it should be considered a public utility or an opt-in service under the law. Essentially, the net neutrality controversy is based on ideas of freedom and fairness.

Those who believe in net neutrality argue that it creates a free, open, and non-prejudicial internet. This is necessary for the democratic interchange of ideas and knowledge, fair business practices, healthy competition, and continuing economic advancement.

Opponents of net neutrality argue that it would actually impair the freedoms of internet service provider companies. The movement for net neutrality has had its obstacles. Despite this, it has proven quite successful, although it is likely to remain contentious for quite some time!