TELECOM Digest OnLine - Sorted: What is Net Neutrality all About?

What is Net Neutrality all About?

Various writers (
Wed, 14 Jun 2006 15:11:48 -0500

What is this about?

This is about Internet freedom. "Network Neutrality" -- the First
Amendment of the Internet -- ensures that the public can view the
smallest blog just as easily as the largest corporate Web site by
preventing Internet companies like AT&T from rigging the playing field
for only the highest-paying sites.

But Internet providers like AT&T, Verizon and Comcast are spending
millions of dollars lobbying Congress to gut Net Neutrality. If
Congress doesn't take action now to implement meaningful network
neutrality provisions, the future of the Internet is at risk.

What is network neutrality?

Network Neutrality - or "Net Neutrality" for short -- is the guiding
principle that preserves the free and open Internet.

Net Neutrality ensures that all users can access the content or run
the applications and devices of their choice. With Net Neutrality, the
network's only job is to move data -- not choose which data to
privilege with higher quality service.

Net Neutrality is the reason why the Internet has driven economic
innovation, democratic participation, and free speech online. It's why
the Internet has become an unrivaled environment for open
communications, civic involvement and free speech.

Who wants to get rid of Net Neutrality?

The nation's largest telephone and cable companies -- including AT&T,
Verizon, Comcast and Time Warner -- want to be Internet gatekeepers,
deciding which Web sites go fast or slow and which won't load at all.

They want to tax content providers to guarantee speedy delivery of
their data. They want to discriminate in favor of their own search
engines, Internet phone services, and streaming video -- while slowing
down or blocking their competitors.

These companies have a new vision for the Internet. Instead of an even
playing field, they want to reserve express lanes for their own
content and services -- or those from big corporations that can afford
the steep tolls -- and leave the rest of us on a winding dirt road.

What's at stake?

Decisions being made now will shape the future of the Internet for a
generation. Before long, all media -- TV, phone and the Web -- will come
to your home via the same broadband connection. The dispute over Net
Neutrality is about who'll control access to new and emerging

On the Internet, consumers are in ultimate control -- deciding between
content, applications and services available anywhere, no matter who
owns the network. There's no middleman. But without Net Neutrality,
the Internet will look more like cable TV. Network owners will decide
which channels, content and applications are available; consumers will
have to choose from their menu.

The Internet has always been driven by innovation. Web sites and
services succeeded or failed on their own merit. Without Net
Neutrality, decisions now made collectively by millions of users will
be made in corporate boardrooms. The choice we face now is whether we
can choose the content and services we want, or whether the broadband
barons will choose for us.

What's happening in Congress?

Congress is now considering a major overhaul of the Telecommunications
Act. The telephone and cable companies are filling up congressional
campaign coffers and hiring high-priced lobbyists. They've set up
"Astroturf" groups like "Hands Off the Internet" to confuse the issue
and give the appearance of grassroots support.

On June 8, the House of Representatives passed the "Communications
Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement Act of 2006," or COPE Act (H.R.
5252) -- a bill that offers no meaningful protections for Net Neutrality. An
amendment offered by Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), which would have instituted
real Net Neutrality requirements, was defeated by intense industry lobbying.

It now falls to the Senate to save the free and open Internet.
Fortunately, Sens. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and Byron Dorgan
(R-N.D.) have introduced a bipartisan measure, the "Internet Freedom
Preservation Act of 2006" (S. 2917), that would provide meaningful
protection for Net Neutrality. This excellent bill may be introduced
as an amendment when the Senate takes up its own rewrite of the
Telecommunications Act later this summer. The next key hearing of the
Senate Commerce Committee is scheduled for June 20.

Call Congress today: No senator can in good conscience vote against Internet
freedom and with the telecom cartel.

Isn't this just a battle between giant telcos and other corporations?

No. Small business owners benefit from an Internet that allows them to
compete directly -- not one where they can't afford the price of
entry. Net Neutrality ensures that innovators can start small and
dream big about being the next EBay or Google without facing
insurmountable hurdles. Without Net Neutrality, startups and
entrepreneurs will be muscled out of the marketplace by big
corporations that pay for a top spot on the Web.

But Net Neutrality doesn't just matter to business owners. If Congress
turns the Internet over to the telephone and cable giants, everyone
who uses the Internet will be affected. Connecting to your office
could take longer if you don't purchase your carrier's preferred
applications. Sending family photos and videos could slow to a
crawl. Web pages you always use for online banking, access to health
care information, planning a trip, or communicating with friends and
family could fall victim to pay-for-speed schemes.

Independent voices and political groups are especially vulnerable.
Costs will skyrocket to post and share video and audio clips,
silencing bloggers and amplifying the big media companies. Political
organizing could be slowed by the handful of dominant Internet
providers who ask advocacy groups or candidates to pay a fee to join
the "fast lane."

Isn't the threat to Net Neutrality just hypothetical?

No. So far, we've only seen the tip of the iceberg. But numerous
examples show that without network neutrality requirements, Internet
service providers will discriminate against content and competing
services they don't like.

a.. In 2004, North Carolina ISP Madison River blocked their DSL customers
from using any rival Web-based phone service.

b.. In 2005, Canada's telephone giant Telus blocked customers from
visiting a Web site sympathetic to the Telecommunications Workers Union
during a labor dispute.

c.. Shaw, a big Canadian cable TV company, is charging an extra $10 a
month to subscribers in order to "enhance" competing Internet telephone

d.. In April, Time Warner's AOL blocked all emails that mentioned -- an advocacy campaign opposing the company's
pay-to-send e-mail scheme.

This type of censorship will become the norm unless we act now. Given
the chance, these gatekeepers will consistently put their own
interests before the public good.

Won't more regulations harm the free Internet? Shouldn't we just let
the market decide?

Writing Net Neutrality into law would preserve the freedoms we
currently enjoy on the Internet. For all their talk about
"deregulation," the cable and telephone giants don't want real
competition. They want special rules written in their favor.

Either we make rules that ensure an even playing field for everyone,
or we have rules that hold the Internet captive to the whims of a few
big companies. The Internet has thrived because revolutionary ideas
like blogs, Wikipedia or Google could start on a shoestring and
attract huge audiences. Without Net Neutrality, the pipeline owners
will choose the winners and losers on the Web.

And when the network owners start abusing their control of the pipes,
there's nowhere else for consumers to turn. The cable and telephone
companies already dominate 98 percent of the broadband market. Only 53
percent of Americans have a choice between cable and DSL at
home. Everyone else has only one choice or no broadband options at
all. That's not what a truly free market looks like.

Who's part of the Coalition?

The coalition is made up of dozens of
groups from across the political spectrum that are concerned about
maintaining a free and open Internet. No corporation or political
party is funding our efforts. We simply agree to a statement of
principles in support of Internet freedom.

Who else supports Net Neutrality?

The supporters of Net Neutrality include leading high-tech companies
such as, Earthlink, EBay, Google, Intel, Microsoft, Skype,
Vonage and Yahoo. Prominent national figures such as Internet pioneer
Vint Cerf, Stanford law professor Lawrence Lessig and FCC Commissioner
Michael Copps have called for stronger Net Neutrality protections.

Editorial boards at the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, San
Francisco Chronicle, San Jose Mercury News and Christian Science
Monitor all have urged congress to save the Internet.

What can I do to help?

Call your representative today and demand that Net Neutrality be

Encourage groups you're part of to please join the

Show your support for Internet freedom on your Web site or blog.

Tell your friends about this crucial issue before it's too late.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do you agree with all this, or do you
find it just a bit shrill? There are several additional essays in
the collection presented here today, please continue reading. PAT]

Post Followup Article Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply
Go to Next message: Various writers : "Net Neutrality as the Big Print Media Defines it"
Go to Previous message: Jason Brault: "Testing Extended Dmarc Cable"
Next in thread: "Re: What is Net Neutrality all About?"
May be reply: "Re: What is Net Neutrality all About?"
May be reply: Tim Scott: "Re: What is Net Neutrality all About?"
May be reply: "Re: What is Net Neutrality all About?"
May be reply: Raqueeb Hassan: "Re: What is Net Neutrality all About?"
May be reply: "Re: What is Net Neutrality all About?"
May be reply: Herb Oxley: "Re: What is Net Neutrality all About?"
TELECOM Digest: Home Page