Net neutrality

What Exactly Is Net Neutrality?

Net neutrality, a term coined by Columbia University media law professor Tim Wu in 2003, is the principle that Internet service providers (ISPs) should treat all online content equally. This means ISPs must not discriminate against or prioritize certain types of traffic over others, ensuring consistent transfer rates for all users and content providers.

The Controversy Surrounding Net Neutrality

Net neutrality advocates argue that it prevents ISPs from filtering Internet content without a court order, fosters freedom of speech and democratic participation, promotes competition and innovation, and maintains the end-to-end principle. However, opponents claim it reduces investment, deters competition, increases taxes, imposes unnecessary regulations, and prevents lower-income individuals from accessing the internet.

Common Carrier Regulations

Net neutrality regulations are often referred to as common carrier regulations. These rules ensure that ISPs act like public utilities, providing equal access to all users without discrimination. A combination of policy instruments can help achieve these goals and realize a range of valued political and economic objectives.

The End-to-End Principle

The end-to-end principle, first proposed in 1981, states that communications protocol operations should occur at the end-points of a system or as close as possible to resources being controlled. This means that any ostensibly arbitrary choice of protocol must be justified by performance optimizations and not by ISPs.

Traffic Shaping and Over-Provisioning

Traffic shaping is the control of computer network traffic to optimize or guarantee performance, while over-provisioning involves making liberal estimates of peak user demand. These practices ensure good quality of service without policing or throttling, promoting a fair and open internet.

Device Neutrality and Invoicing

Device neutrality ensures freedom of choice and communication for users of network-connected devices, requiring both network operators and device vendors to be neutral in their application policies. Invoicing and tariffs allow ISPs to set a balance between base subscription tariffs and pay-per-use meters, while providing fair use guarantees.

The Dumb Pipe vs Smart Pipes

Experts compare dumb pipes to smart pipes in the context of Internet policy, debating which concept is more applicable. A dumb pipe refers to a network with little control or management, similar to a water supply system providing a steady source of water without discrimination.

The End-to-End Principle and Net Neutrality

The end-to-end principle is central to Internet design and often enters discussions about net neutrality. The principle ensures that all content is treated equally, preventing ISPs from favoring certain types of traffic over others. This concept is closely related and sometimes seen as a direct precursor to the principle of net neutrality.

Discrimination by Protocol

Discrimination by protocol involves favoring or blocking information based on aspects of the communications protocol used for communication. A US appeals court ruled in April 2010 that the FCC exceeded its authority when sanctioning Comcast for throttling peer-to-peer file-sharing services, but a study verified that Comcast stopped BitTorrent throttling practices.

Peering Discrimination and Netflix’s Deal

Peering discrimination is another issue in net neutrality debates. For example, Netflix’s deal with Comcast in 2014 improved service quality through prioritization, while favoring fast-loading websites has also been noted as a reason for regulation due to research showing low tolerance to slow content providers.

Legal Enforcement and Regulatory Models

Legal enforcement of net neutrality principles takes various forms, including provisions against anti-competitive blocking and throttling. However, research suggests that a single policy instrument may not be enough to achieve all the goals central to the debate. Net neutrality rules are administered on a national or regional basis, with the US being one of the world leaders in online services but also facing similar problems.

Global Perspectives

The Save the Internet Act was passed by the US House of Representatives in 2019 but not by the Senate. Net neutrality rules were repealed in the US in 2017 and reinstated in 2024, but were struck down by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals on January 2nd, 2025, ruling that the FCC lacked authority to regulate ISPs.

Net Neutrality in Other Countries

Net neutrality is not enforced in China and India. Indonesia’s exclusive deals between ISPs and building owners could limit consumer choices and speeds. The US has affordable entry-level prices for fixed broadband, according to the OECD, while investment in the US broadband industry is several multiples that of Europe.

Supporters and Critics

Proponents of net neutrality regulations include consumer advocates, human rights organizations, online companies, and technology companies. Internet Slowdown Day took place in September 2014, with participants including Netflix and Reddit. Consumer Reports, Open Society Foundations, and civil rights groups support net neutrality.

Critics of Net Neutrality

ISPs, broadband and telecommunications companies, economists, and notable technologists oppose net neutrality regulations. Many major hardware and telecommunications companies oppose reclassifying broadband as a common carrier under Title II. Economists like Gary Becker have argued that claims for regulation do not provide a compelling rationale due to significant competition among broadband access providers.

The Future of Net Neutrality

Preserving Internet standards and maintaining the end-to-end principle are also reasons for supporting network neutrality. The FCC considers reclassifying broadband Internet service as a telecommunications service to preserve net neutrality, while opponents argue that allowing cable companies to charge for faster internet speeds would create an exploitative business model based on gatekeeping.

Conclusion

The debate over net neutrality is complex and multifaceted. While it aims to ensure a free and open internet, critics argue it could stifle investment and competition. The future of the internet depends on finding a balance that protects innovation while ensuring equal access for all users.