Net neutrality in the broadest sense is open Internet. More specifically though, net neutrality is the principle that internet providers should give consumers access to all legal content and applications on an equal basis. This means that they should not favor some sources or block others. It also prohibits Internet providers from charging a fee to deliver their content faster and/or slowing down content from other competing providers.
Many people argue that because customers are already paying for connectivity they deserve to get a quality experience. Among these people are Apple and Google. They believe that they should be able to do whatever they want with their Internet (if it is legal) and not be discriminated based on what websites they visit. They also think that not having net neutrality might give Internet service providers too much power that could easily be abused then. This is because they can easily increase the fee for accessing a popular website and therefore they can make a profit. Another problem is that while big services like Netflix could, in theory, afford to pay Comcast for using extra bandwidth, the small, lesser-known services can’t. Really great web sites or Internet services might never gain popularity merely because ISPs would have control over what kind of access users have to that service. That could greatly stifle innovation.
Some people argue that the new rules are too heavy-handed and could prohibit investment and innovation. But the majority of these people are the companies that would otherwise be profiting; they are the AT&Ts and Comcasts. These providers also believe that they should be able to distribute bandwidth differently depending on the service, according to one article. Or if they aren’t going to distribute it differently then someone should be paying more money for it. For example, if Netflix is sucking up all their bandwidth, they should be the ones to pay for the necessary updates that Comcast’s systems will require because of it.
I am for net neutrality. Although I understand the other side I think that it giving the Internet service providers is too much of a risk. I also believe that I should not be judged for the different websites I access. It is part of their job to provide those to me. I am paying them for that. I should not have to worry about if others are accessing those same websites and now they became popular, that is why the other people are also paying them. And on the topic of innovation, the Internet service providers could potentially block out new websites that have innovative ideas and solutions and are being blocked because they just do not have the money to be accessed. So I am not worried about preventing innovation.
Based on the readings and my opinion I think that the Internet is a public service and fair access should be a basic right.
hnichol2blog 