“Network neutrality” is concept whereby all data packets (and devices) are treated equally on a computer network. In laymen’s terms, a “network neutral” ISP would not discriminate between basic web surfing, email traffic, streaming video traffic, P2P traffic, VoIP traffic, podcast traffic, instant messaging traffic, and so on. Each and every data packet would be treated exactly the same, regardless of where it comes from or what it contains. If this sounds like the basic definition of “the Internet” to you… well, you’d be right.
As it stands now, most ISPs in the US are running more or less neutral networks. But this might not be the case tomorrow, or the next day. And although a few large US ISPs are currently experimenting with ditching network neutrality as it relates to illicit file trading, these same ISPs have, in the not too distant past, discussed grandiose plans for shattering the Internet as we know it. It’s called “tiered service”.
Basically, ISPs want to charge websites and content providers to allow “guaranteed delivery” of their content. If a content provider can’t (or won’t) pay these “quality of services fees”, then their data will be pushed to “the back of the bus”. While it doesn’t sound like a terribly bad idea at first, the end result of these fees would be a disaster for end users and content providers. Content providers would have to negotiate such fees with any ISP that wished to implement tiered service; although most US Internet users are serviced by a handful of giant ISPs, there are still thousands of small ISPs that content providers would have to negotiate with. Such fees would also cut deeply into the bottom lines of many content providers. So your favorite podcast or streaming audio\video site might simply choose to shut down rather than pay out the nose for something they’ve had for free for years. “Mom and Pop” Internet sites and blogs might cease to exist entirely. Start-up companies developing new and innovative Internet technologies would see their products langish for lack of funds to pay an “ISP tax”. Some companies might choose to leave the U.S. altogether for “network neutral” countries in Europe or Asia. And of course, ISPs could enter into agreements with certain companies that give them kickbacks… so Comcast could have a “preferred online bank” that loads much faster than some other online bank that doesn’t pay the ISP tax or enter into a licensing agreement with Comcast. Imagine a world where Google refuses to enter into such an agreement with an ISP and refuses to pay the ISP tax… now imagine all your Google searches timing out and giving you errors while “Yahoo! Search Brought To You By Comcast” works beautifully. Or imagine if iTunes were to resist jumping on the tiered service bandwagon… suddenly your iTunes purchases take hours to download instead of seconds as they did before, and Comcast’s only solution is for you to sign up for their “ComcasticMusic” site… where tracks cost $2.99 each instead of 99¢ and have more draconian DRM than their Apple counterparts. THAT’S tiered service in a nutshell.
Continue reading “Why We Need “Network Neutrality” (part 1)”