Net Neutrality - Virtual Community
From WolfWikis
Image by Ben Dib, Distributed by MinutemanMedia.org
Contents |
Overview
The movement to "Save the Internet" supports "network neutrality" over "tiered service" models for broadband Internet service. The movement seeks to preserve the status quo of the Internet over proposed tiered service, which would give broadband providers the right to privilege certain information over others on their networks. The movement demands that government intervention in the form of regulation is necessary to prohibit broadband providers from such action.
Potential negative outcomes of an unregulated tiered service model are wide ranging, and range from slower service on pages that do not pay the ISP for top tier speeds, unfair preference given to ISP branded sites and services (including VoIP), and outright blocking of content.
Broadband providers argue that the cost of building out broadband infrastructure comes at a cost, and that high-bandwidth content providers should be charged to help defray that cost:
"Now what they would like to do is use my pipes free, but I ain't going to let them do that because we have spent this capital and we have to have a return on it. So there's going to have to be some mechanism for these people who use these pipes to pay for the portion they're using... [W]e and the cable companies have made an investment and for a Google or Yahoo! (YHOO) or Vonage or anybody to expect to use these pipes [for] free is nuts!" – SBC Telecommunications (AT&T) CEO Edward Whitacre Interview from Business Week [1]
Proponents of Network Neutrality counter that ISPs are already paid on both ends of the line- both consumers and internet-based companies pay for internet connections. Proponents argue that both parties are entitled to "get what they pay for"; if ISPs can't cover their expenses with these existing monthly premiums they should raise their rates, not block/limit/degrade content.
The entirety of the Network Neutrality debate is a result of the business model adopted by ISPs; ISPs have historically built their businesses on a practice known as "overselling": selling more of your service than you have capacity to deliver, banking on the assumption that not all of your customers will use your service at the same time. This business model has proven effective in many arenas such as water companies and cellular-wireless providers, which both engage in overselling.
ISPs have run into trouble, however, with the fact that they made the assumption that overselling was a feasible business model for the internet back when the internet was still immature and it's potential uses largely unknown or undeveloped. Over the last ten years an increasing number of high-bandwidth uses for the internet have become popular, grossly exceeding ISPs' long-term bandwidth predictions.
ISPs are seeking to rectify this situation through artificial infrastructure limits that violate the principle of "Network Neutrality". Those consuming the most bandwidth counter that they can only use as much bandwidth as the ISP agreed to give them when they signed up for their service; if the ISP estimates were inaccurate the customer shouldn't be punished and is entitled to recieve the service they are paying for.
ISPs don't agree, citing advertising that promisses speeds "up to", but not "at", certain rates. They also feel justified in pursuing these network management techniques because a minority of users are responsible for a majority of bandwidth consumption; ISPs feel that spending an amount of money on infrastructure improvements that is disproportionate to the percentage of their customers afflicted is unreasonable, despite the fact that they are contractually bound to deliver to their customers the speeds they promised, disproportionate or not.
Save the Internet
Description from savetheinternet.com:
"The SavetheInternet.com Coalition is more than a million everyday people who have banded together with thousands of non-profit organizations, businesses and bloggers to protect Internet freedom.
The Coalition believes that the Internet is a crucial engine for economic growth and free speech. We are working together to urge Congress to preserve Network Neutrality, the First Amendment of the Internet, which ensures that the Internet remains open to new ideas, innovation and progress.
From its beginnings, the Internet has leveled the playing field for all. Everyday people can have their voices heard by thousands, even millions of people. The SavetheInternet.com Coalition -- representing millions of Americans from all walks of life -- is working together to ensure that Congress passes no telecommunications legislation without meaningful and enforceable Network Neutrality protections. "
Members [3]
Video explaining net neutrality from "Save the Internet": [4]
Open Internet Coalition
Description from openinternetcoalition.com:
"The Internet has been the most successful platform for economic growth, innovation and discovery in our nation’s history. The Open Internet Coalition represents consumers, grassroots organizations, and businesses working in pursuit of a shared goal: keeping the Internet fast, open and accessible to all Americans.
Our coalition speaks for tens of millions of Americans and spans the entire political spectrum. We stand together for protecting an open Internet where everyone can access what they want when they want. In Washington and state capitals across the country we’re working for policies like network neutrality and universal access to high-speed Internet connections that will benefit all of us, not just the large phone and cable companies who sell connections to the Internet."
Members [6]
Non-profit Organizations Supporting Net Neutrality
– Free Press [7] Free Press is an organization founded by Robert McChesney that works on pro-active media reform legislation. Free Press is the Coalition Coordinator for the Save the Internet Coalition.
– Center for Digital Democracy [8] "Without net neutrality, the power to discriminate would be given to those who provide internet services (Verizon, AT&T,and Comcast among others). They would have gatekeeper status – the ability to dictate the speeds at which users can access any site on the Internet. While open access remains the broader ideal for openness, interconnectivity, and ensuring a level playing field in a competitive online marketplace, net neutrality is a specific legislative means to achieve that goal. Blogs, websites dedicated to controversial issues, nonprofit websites, or small businesses whose competitors have deeper pockets are all at risk of having their sites relegated to the slow lane." From Center for Digital Democracy
– Information Policy Action Committee (iPAC) [9] Position on net neutrality from iPAC blog on ipaction.org August 9, 2007: "AT&T wants us to trust them. It's ok for them to have a monopoly over Internet access for many consumers in areas without multiple broadband options, they say, no need to require neutrality or open access because they'll never use their power to favor certain connections over others for censorship, only to improve service to consumers."
– Public Knowledge [10] Net Neutrality is one of the major issues discussed on the PK website and blog. The movement ties in with the organizations mission:
"Public Knowledge is a public-interest advocacy organization dedicated to fortifying and defending a vibrant information commons. This Washington, D.C. based group works with wide spectrum of stakeholders — libraries, educators, scientists, artists, musicians, journalists, consumers, software programmers, civic groups and enlightened businesses — to promote the core conviction that some fundamental democratic principles and cultural values — openness, access, and the capacity to create and compete — must be given new embodiment in the digital age." - Mission from www.publicknowledge.org
– Save Access [11] Save Access also believes in an open Internet, and is against large telco mergers. This site also features information on "the Bells" a map of which shows the re-emerging of the Bell monopoly [12]
Prominent Individuals Behind the Movement
Prominent individuals involved in the movement are listed below along with short backgrounds and a brief mention of what they have done to advance net neutrality:
– Robert McChesney - Research Professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. bio [13]
– Tim Wu, professor at Columbia Law School - bio [14]
– Lawrence Lessig, Professor of Law at Stanford Law School - bio [15]
– Tim Berners-Lee, Inventor of the World Wide Web and Senior Research Scientist at MIT - bio [16]
Organizations Opposed to Network Neutrality
There are a variety of organizations opposed to the net neutral movement - many have joined coalitions that support tiered service models. More information about these groups can be found by following the links below:
Net Competition[17] Members[18] Video on netcompetition.org [19]