Before taking this class, I had never heard of net neutrality, let alone understood what it meant for me as a daily Internet user. Since seeing the bright light that is copyright, net neutrality really is a concept that people should learn more about because if net neutrality were to disappear, then it would not only affect big corporations but also the average user. After Tim Wu’s talk, I was on CNN and happened upon the above clip, which really got to the heart of net neutrality and what it means for the average user.
Tim Wu describes the Internet as meritocratic in that the little guys like Gary Maricle who sells chilies on the Internet has the same access to the Internet as companies such as AT&T. If net neutrality were to change, then companies like AT&T would be able to pay more for faster service, thus providing priority service for those who can afford it. This priority service could have devastating consequences. The current system allows for innovation to occur. Maricle can afford his website at $200 a month to sell his chilies. He can include high-resolution pictures and text because he has unlimited bandwidth. If net neutrality were to change, the amount of bandwidth that Maricle uses would cost too much overhead for his business to survive. Therefore, entry into the market level would be impossible for some small businesses, and innovation outside of major corporations would be hard to afford.
On October 22, 2009 the FCC approved of a plan that would continue to protect net neutrality. The rules are open for debate for 60 days to allow the public to weigh in on the rules. The rules include:
- Broadband providers must not block users from sending legal content on the Internet.
- Broadband providers must allow user to connect any devices and use any applications that do not harm the network.
- Broadband providers must not prevent competitions among ISPs and online services.
- Broadband providers cannot discriminate against content services such as VoIP services.
- Broadband providers must disclose information concerning network management.
Not everyone has supported the FCC’s proposed rules. Senator McCain’s Internet Freedom Act of 2009 would limit the authority of the FCC to propose regulations on the Internet. On the other hand, some companies like Mozilla support the new FCC rules. John Lilly, CEO of Mozilla, and Mitchell Baker, chair of Mozilla, said in a statement, “The fundamental technologies of the Internet have always been open; the FCC’s proposed rules would merely preserve that openness.”
Net neutrality provides openness and access to the Internet that is vital for innovation to occur. Even as “little people,” we can start a business online because we can afford to do so. If the rules of net neutrality were to disappear, our Internet access would change dramatically. We could get onto AT&T’s website or any other corporation who can afford life in the “fast lane,” while the people like Gary Maricle would be forced to change the way he does business. Net neutrality is vital to the openness that is the World Wide Web. As copyright aficionados, do you believe net neutrality is important to keeping the Internet innovative and democratic? Is there a possible compromise between supporters and opponents of net neutrality that would provide priority service without affecting innovation?
