Companies and Net Neutrality - Essay Example

? Net Neutrality of Net Neutrality Introduction Today the internet has come to a point where every individual considers it as an important part of his/her life. It helps individuals to keep up with their friends, their country and the world. It also permits people to entertain and often waste time in a number of games and multimedia content that make them laugh and mourn, pretending to be a magician in a mythological fantasy world. In addition to this, the internet in today’s world is so natural and good for many people, but it is recognized to be in danger of extinction (Quora, 2010). “How, What, Impossible,” many would say, when they know that today internet providers have the capability of controlling what everyone goes through, does and believes in for the purpose of getting profit i.e., violate network neutrality. Discussion Internet is at war as one of its basic structural principles is threatened. Telecommunication companies are pressuring major political institutions to intervene and modify neutrality. Users and native internet companies are defending tooth and nail. The debate is open, but the reality is that most people affected by the violation of this principle know its meaning and implications (wiseGEEK, 2003). Companies and Net Neutrality The net neutrality means that bits are not discriminated, and there is no such thing as first or second class for such categories as destination, source, protocol or content. From this definition it follows that any company that provides internet services (ISPs) can manipulate, manage, hinder or prevent user access to some Internet services according to their specific interests. Telecommunication companies control access and transport network information. Undoubtedly, Internet service providers are identified as the main threat. Operators have proposed prioritizing some services over others, and some even speak of the payment of “tolls” and quotas to companies that fill the web content. According to a research it is clear that "The telecom operators want to do much more business with internet by increasing the charges for access as well as monetizing the content that others want to view as if it was their own network. Another goal of the ISP would "limit services (such as IP telephony or video conferencing) within their networks and extract revenues from people who earn a lot of money on the Web, like Google." (Quora, 2010) They provide the “data pipes” ensuring that any person [at a price] can connect and access all network resources. Currently, these entities hold true to a “code of honor” that prevents them from taking control of the content by these ways. This code means net neutrality: all content and services distributed through the pipes must be treated equally, regardless of person or entity (Quora, 2010). Neutrality still seems intact, but many users report behaviors of operators that already violate this basic principle of the network and most of the information highway studies confirm the dirty war of the companies providing internet against p2p networks. But network neutrality is not limited to a dispute over the division of the economic pie concerning technology or the battle against piracy but it is a concept that has entered the political game. According to some studies, the ISPs will accompany some European governments, in matters concerning the net transfer of money to the other side of the Atlantic in areas such as digital advertising. Perhaps for this reason, politicians have not been clear. There is no community legislation regarding Network Neutrality (Quora, 2010). The problem is that this policy is not neutrally supported by any law or regulated by any relevant entity. Therefore, their survival depends on "common sense" of users and, primarily, the network providers. The latter is the source of danger as the common sense of the big companies is generally shaped by the opportunities to make money and it can’t be ruled out at some point that they may take control of internet content and destroy the said neutrality. (Quora, 2010) Different telecommunication companies could take control of content distribution by setting a price for the same services such as only enabling a user to view their content or use their services upon paying a monthly fee. In addition, the speed of delivery may also vary: if one keeps his/her content under the lowest monthly payment, then his/her page or service appears on the screen or to the client more slowly than for those who pay more (Ocf.berkeley.edu, 2012). Moreover, if someone does not have enough money, it is very likely that his/her page will take more time to appear and may not be accessible via Google searches or simply can be referred to as nonexistent. Clearly, this situation does affect all people who use internet. All those who rely on the internet as the primary means of distribution services, entertainment, music, games and research studies [to name a few] will be affected. In other words, the wealth and the opportunities offered by the internet would be crushed. Another form of control could be an additional cost above the cost of access that is currently being paid to internet providers. The same limits directly the variety of content that users would be able to receive (Ocf.berkeley.edu, 2012). Net Neutrality in US In US, the net neutrality is largely dispersed and thus the focus of this paper is mainly based on United States. At this time, this concept is simply considered as an essential and broad expression which allows any telecommunication company to set the basic rate for each internet user on usage of any internet content or service. With an essential and broad expression, it means that there are no authorized limitations on charging more or less for different usage of broadband width and actual data usage (Quora, 2010). To a very great extent Internet Service Providers (ISP’s) have a tendency to control the usage of services by way of blocking certain internet ports or deliberately slowing down the internet speed. This act of internet service providers (ISP’s) prevents the users from using the internet or specific web sites or makes it impossible to download certain information from the internet. In the recent past, this concern is being widely recognized because of the high pressure from the users of internet and internet service providers (ISP’s) and therefore, telecommunication companies should have to agree to or commit to a “common carriage” agreement. (Quora, 2010) Regulations In US, there isn’t any law regarding network neutrality, in spite of the fact that there is a casual arrangement in place to uphold user rights. However, some European countries and Japan do have laws regarding the use of internet; these laws are established on the principle of net neutrality. In most instances, telecommunication companies are permitted to block specified network or they can charge more from various content providers (Lawteacher.net, 2011). Moreover, similar transparency guidelines are present which oblige telecommunication companies to inform their consumers regarding whatever data are assigned a priority, bandwidth range, or other schemes which the ISPs utilize for controlling the traffic that moves throughout the system. Arguments against the Network Neutrality in US There are many people in United States who are against this concept of net neutrality. People who offer opposition to network neutrality in many cases include companies being involved in internet regulation, main internet service providers, companies providing cable system and prominent profitable websites (Cleland, 2012). Several opponents propose that network neutrality is unneeded for the reason that other net systems are controlled from their largest subscribers and are yet capable of working reasonably. Every time that an internet service provider blocks its clients from accessing specific sites, for instance, the users could switch to a different service provider; thus, blocking material could make the ISP noncompetitive. In addition to this opponents argue that additional control by the government over the internet's fundamental network could result in raised security review and the wrongful intrusion by the government into private affairs which are none of the public’s concern. In various nations where the government for the most part controls telecommunication networks, there are several cases in which services and content were blocked for the reason that they can be used to build resistance against the dominating company. Furthermore, they argue that telecommunication companies should not be lawfully forced to transmit or receive data from competitors or other web sites they find objectionable, which has been encountered in isolated incidents (Cleland, 2012). Conclusion The concept of “net neutrality” means that companies that provide internet access are required to treat all sources equally. The debate revolves around two points. First, whether companies should be able to access providers to give preferential treatment to those companies that pay for a faster data transmission and, secondly, whether they can block or retard speed of content. In a changing world, where crisis looms, neutrality is a core value necessary not only for the virtual and technological development, but also for the maintenance of democracy and the strengthening of public freedom. Without net neutrality no venture, no knowledge society will flourish as well as there will be no collective intelligence and all that will exist is what has been desired by only a few. References Cleland, S. (2012). U.S. Net Neutrality Movement in Retreat. Retrieved from: http://precursorblog.com/content/us-net-neutrality-movement-retreat. Lawteacher.net. (2011). Network Neutrality United States of America and Canada | Law Teacher. Retrieved from: http://www.lawteacher.net/commercial-law/essays/net-neutrality-united-states-law-essays.php. Ocf.berkeley.edu. (2012). NET NEUTRALITY: other arguments. Retrieved from: http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~raylin/other.html. Quora. (2010). What are the strongest arguments against net neutrality? Retrieved from: http://www.quora.com/What-are-the-strongest-arguments-against-net-neutrality. wiseGEEK. (2003). What Is Net Neutrality? Retrieved from: http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-net-neutrality.html. Read More