Key Aspects of Net Neutrality - Coursework Example

Running Head: net neutrality Net Neutrality of the of the of the Introduction Net neutrality is a concept emphasizing on the fact that internet service providers and governments across the globe should treat all the internet data and information equally rather than discriminating between them. It is further proposed that discrimination should not be favored and charging differentially by users, contents, sites, and applications should not be facilitated (Saltzer, et al, 2004). Net neutrality can be further defined as a backbone for many network users and service providers in last many years. Internet service providers have been offering variable pricing models to a number of end users based on the quality of services being offered. Initially, the Federal Communication Commission offered a draft allowing ISPs to offer slow broadband lanes to users by reclassifying it as a telecommunication service. However, it was opposed to net neutrality (Gary, 2010). The situation changed in 2015 when FCC made a ruling in the form of section 706 of the Telecommunication Act 1996 by forming new regulations to be applied on both wireless and wired internet connections (Wu, 2003).In this particular discussion, the debate revolves around Letecha Dixon representing FCC and is a proponent to legalize net neutrality. Her argument will be revolving around the fact that regulations will lead to better degree of transparency in the network provision. Sara Myones will be representing Verizon which is a service provider and strongly opposes the concept of net neutrality on the basis that this law affects the incentive to invest on their part causing slow and least innovative networks. Faza Chugtai is an opponent of net neutrality representing Netflix by debating that net neutrality is important as it leads to slow network and little business growth for company using large bandwidth. Emma Esperon represents ALA and stands for the public, institutions and government. She believes that net neutrality will create high level of transparency along with reducing the level of discrimination in a significant manner. Conflict In this particular debate, the conflict revolves around the legalization of net neutrality. The Federal Communication Commission (FCC) along with American Library Association (ALA) are in favor of net neutrality while Netflix and Verizon opposing the concept of new neutrality. From the case perspective, FCC believed that new neutrality will lead better degree of transparency and ALA and Netflix also believed on same line. However, Verizon and Michael Powell thought differently by opposing the idea of net neutrality on the grounds of net neutrality leading to slow innovative growth and harmful for the society (Sterbenz, 2015). In this regard, Verizon stated that net neutrality will compel organisations from being innovative and will not offer any incentive (Matyszczyk, 2015). In this regard, FCC pointed that differences in the pricing will surely affect the loyalty of customers in the long run. Customers want to experience equal flow of data and information and slow and fast flow of data and information will surely have an impact on their loyalty. Additionally, what matters is the equal distribution of data and information and customer loyalty rather than unequal and unsatisfied customers (Cox, 2015). It can be further stated that the views and opinions of Verizon are very much normative in nature considering the fact that they are opinion based and cannot be approved or disproved but can only be challenged. Additionally, the FCC questioned the distribution of economic cost and benefits based on the ground that service providers offering differentiated price and services will be having an upper hand and monopoly (Cox, 2015).Additionally; this will affect the structure of market in a significant manner along with changing the demand and supply pattern in a significant manner. In this regard, it is important to address the issue of discrimination in prices as without it, companies will find it difficult to operate especially after the imposed rules and regulations. The discrimination in price can be assumed as a positive economic statement that needs to be tested for the purpose of proving and disproving (Rushe, 2015) On issue of discrimination in pricing, ALA debated that intellectual rights should be free and with the advent of modern technologies, information should reach out to everyone rather than to few people and organizations. In the favor of net neutrality, ALA proposed that resources should not be neglected to varied mode of distribution based on the pricing as it will affect the intellectual freedom being fostered by the internet. The normative point of Verizon in this regard was strongly debated by ALA in the form of questioning the issue of pricing discrimination affecting the flow of information and offering benefits to people willing to spend good amount of money on quality speed. However, this is purely based on discrimination and against the social and intellectual rights. The next question was asked to FCC in regards to net neutrality, streamlining the prices and quality of network prices by service providers leads to less investments and profits on their part. Is that neutral to the service providers or unfair treatment? ALA stated that there is no doubt that streamlining of prices and quality of network will be beneficial for the masses even though it may reduce the numbers of investment but it will foster the flow of information (Peterson, 2014). On the other hand, Verizon strongly stated that less investment in information technology will surely affect the economy as service providers will not getting any incentive in terms of investing in innovative technologies. Additionally, the value creation process for stakeholders will be affected as the business model will revolve around equality in every regard. Michael Powell further proposed that new neutrality will be harmful for the service providers as being neutral to the service provider will justify the concept of equality but it will be unfair on the part of service providers as they will get little motivation in terms of adding more value to the existing and potential services (Powell, 2015). Verizon also pointed that organsiations cannot be throve for equableness especially in the competitive business environment as innovation is driven by differentiation and it should be respected rather regulated and thus affecting its scope and profitability in the long run. The third question in this debate was for Michael Powell in the form of how these transitions will affect the infrastructure, private to public. Michael Powell stated that net neutrality will be harmful for the private organizations as there will be less competition and innovation in place (Powell, 2015). Additionally, the transition from private to public will affect the private organizations in a significant manner. However, ALA debated that government and regulatory frameworks will help in facilitating the concept of equality along with offering the opportunity of accessing wide arrays of information to the common people without any discrimination. The transition from private to public will be painful for private organizations but will help the masses in the long run. Additionally, it was found that the transition from private to public will affect the infrastructure to an extent. Private organisations have the liberty to spend on innovative infrastructure as per their needs and demands prevailing in the market but public infrastructure is based on certain budget that will affect the infrastructure in a critical manner. In the context of Netflix, it was found that the company has been supporting the FCC move to regulate the internet like a public utility. The support came in the form of the idea perceived by the company stating that internet service providers can create fast lanes and may charge additional or preferential amount and thus will create a situation of discrimination (Homonoff, 2015).This may also affect the position of the company in later years. FCC stated that net neutrality will offer equal benefits and thus eliminating the chance for preferential treatment. Last question for the debate was for ALA in the form of how the enactment of net neutrality promotes equality and the quality of education. ALA responded that it is important for people to receive equal information without any discrimination and books and internet connect people along with offering a platform to learn and in this regard net neutrality is an important act that needs to be supported. FCC also stated that with the support of so many big organizations, net neutrality and intellectual freedom is critical for the success of any democracy. Applications, Regulations, Laws, and Norms In one of the legal cases including Verizon and FCC, the DC Circuit Court in the year 2014 ruled that the FCC has no authority in enforcing the net neutrality rules as service providers are not regarded as common carriers (Lee, 2015). The court, however agreed that FCC can regulate the broadband by using more specific rules identifying the service providers as common carriers. FCC also formed a different approach while permitting ISPs such as Verizon to offer content providers such as Netflix and Google faster connection speeds as they were willing to pay higher price so that their customers can have preferential rights and access. However, Netflix stated that the effect of new rules can slow down the internet and can have adverse effect on the flow of data and information. Another regulation was initiated by the Free Press including ALA in the form of launching the Savetheinternet.com ensuring that the Congress passes no telecommunication legislation without protecting the net neutrality. In the legal context, FCC has considerable amount of flexibility in terms of deciding how to regulate the internet access as per the 2005 Supreme Court Decision. This suggested that FCC has the clear authority in terms of regulating the internet. However, from normative perspective, Michael Powell and other opponents stated to challenge the power of FCC by filing a legal lawsuit arguing that FCCs new regulations are illegal (Tsukayama, 2015). In another case of normative norms, it was found that Netflix was pressurized by the internet service provider to pay more for the broadband services in order to enjoy high speed internet. However, the concept of net neutrality offered much needed comfort and cushion to the organisation in terms of being devoid of discrimination. Overall, it can be said that there have been legal cases, regulatory frameworks and also normative and subjective opinions on the issue of net neutrality mainly by the opponents and proponents of the same. However, it is an ongoing debate that may continue for a long period of time. Applicable Theory In regards to the net neutrality, Game Theory can be assumed as one of the most important and useful theories that can be associated with the stated phenomenon. The theory is the study of strategic decision making related to the conflict and cooperation between the intelligent and rationale decisions makers. Game Theory is mainly used in the political science, psychology, and also in the computer science. The theory suggested that the gain of one person is the loss of other participant and the theory has been applied to a number of behavioral relations. The theory can be strongly related to net neutrality as few organizations in the form of Netflix and FCC strongly proposed it while Michael Powell and Verizon strongly opposed it. ALA stated that net neutrality will help many in gaining vast information along with facilitating equality while Michael Powell stated that new neutrality will be harmful for many organizations in the form of mitigating the innovation and competition. The CEO of Verizon stated that users using too much of internet will be charged more as they will be able to contribute to the investment in keeping the web healthy. Additionally, this also includes companies like Netflix using a lot of bandwidth. In this regard, Netflix stated that too much of additional payment in the form of using extra bandwidth will affect their operational framework and thus will not lead to additional investment. Thus, there is a clear case of one organization getting benefitted while the other loosing something. Verizon wanted a two sided market involving payment for internet from the subscriber and by companies wanting to reach them while ALA wanted open and equal access for everyone in order to facilitate equality in sharing and accessing wide arrays of information. In this regard, it can be said that the Game Theory seems to be appropriate in terms of identifying benefits being availed by few and potential losses by few in the business environment. Recommendations The strong point of FCC in regards to the net neutrality is in the form of allowing all users to share internet while keeping adequate speed and performance along with benefitting all. In regards to Verizon, net neutrality may affect the investment prospects of companies leading to loss to service providers. In regards to ALA, net neutrality facilitates equality that is important for the fairness in the society and can be considered as a useful strength in the context of the social welfare and development. Weaknesses in the case of opponents can be identified in the form of focusing on personal development and losses rather than thinking about the social welfare and equality but they cannot be blamed for this considering the nature of the business. Overall, it can be said that in order to solve this issue, it is important to identify top 100 organizations across the world and seeking their vote on net neutrality. This will help in analysing their opinions from individual and social point of view. Finally, the focus should be on social welfare and business organizations should support it in order to offer equal access of information to everyone without any discrimination. References Belvedere, M (2015) Ex-FCC chief shocked by Obama net rules meddling. Retrieved from http://www.cnbc.com/id/102450337 Cox, K (2015) FCC Chair: Comcast Made Right Decision Scrapping Merger; Plan For Net Neutrality Is “Not To Lose”. Retrieved from http://consumerist.com/2015/05/04/fcc-chair-comcast-made-right-decision-scrapping-merger-plan-for-net-neutrality-is-not-to-lose/ Gary S. (2010) Computer Information. Journal of Competition Law & Economics, 6(3), 497–519 Lee, T (2015). Heres Big Cables plan to stop the FCCs net neutrality rules. Retrieved from http://www.vox.com/2015/4/15/8421561/cable-lawsuit-net-neutrality Matyszczyk, C (2015) Verizon uses Morse code to mock Net neutrality ruling. Retrieved from http://www.cnet.com/news/verizon-uses-morse-code-1934-date-to-mock-net-neutrality-ruling/ Peterson, A (2014) Why the death of net neutrality would be a disaster for libraries. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/05/16/why-the-death-of-net-neutrality-would-be-a-disaster-for-libraries/ Powell, M (2015) I support Net neutrality, but that is not what the FCC just did. Retrieved from http://www.cnet.com/news/i-support-net-neutrality-that-is-not-what-the-fcc-just-did/ Reardon, M (2014) Worried about Net neutrality? Maybe its the FCC that should really concern you. Retreived from http://www.cnet.com/news/worried-about-net-neutrality-maybe-its-the-fcc-that-should-really-concern-you/ Rushe, D (2015) Net neutrality activists score landmark victory in fight to govern the internet. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/26/net-neutrality-activists-landmark-victory-fcc Sterbenz, C (2015) Verizon had a clever response to todays big net neutrality vote. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.in/Verizon-had-a-clever-response-to-todays-big-net-neutrality-vote/articleshow/46388880.cms Saltzer, Z, et al (2004) End-to-end arguments in system design". ACM Transactions on Computer Systems 2 (4): 277–288. Tsukayama, H (2015) The FCC’s chairman has a killer plan to fight its net neutrality lawsuits. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2015/05/04/the-fccs-chairman-has-a-killer-plan-to-fight-its-net-neutrality-lawsuits/ Wu, T (2003) Network Neutrality, Broadband Discrimination. Journal of Telecommunications and High Technology Law 2: 141 Read More