The delays can be noticeable on some online applications

CASE STUDY -1

BA 633: Information Systems Infrastructure.

Prof: Fred Rose.

NET NEUTRALITY

Anvesh Veldandi

Student no: 558046.

1. This case focuses on the Net Neutrality debate in the United States. Do some Internet research on international

views of Net Neutrality and summarize how views of this issue differ within and across other countries.

Network neutrality has been a contentious issue in the United States for several years, but is increasingly debated

elsewhere, with the EU, several European countries, and the Japanese government all examining the issue.

Net neutrality does not have a single, unanimously accepted definition even within, let alone across, countries.

Nevertheless, proponents of net neutrality generally believe that a structure in which the Internet’s intelligence lies

primarily at the edges of the network, with the edges connected by relatively “dumb pipes” is responsible for the

Internet’s diversity and innovation. They fear that without some regulation broadband providers may discriminate in

favor of their own or sponsored applications, or might degrade traffic to sites that do not pay for better quality of

service tiers.

Net neutrality debates in the U.S. have focused primarily on regulations regarding how broadband providers could

price and manage traffic on their networks. The debate in Europe, has generally focused instead on the role

unbundling mandatory network sharing can play in keeping networks neutral. Unbundling

proponents argue that if the infrastructure provider does not offer retail services or is only one of many retailers

offering service over its infrastructure it will have less incentive to discriminate in favor of or against particular

content. Unbundling opponents typically do not discuss it in the context of net neutrality, but note that it can reduce

incentives to invest in the underlying infrastructure. This paper first examines the net neutrality debate in countries

other than United States. It explores net neutrality in the U.K., France, Denmark, the Netherlands,

Germany, Sweden, South Korea, and Japan. Because net neutrality is another type of mandatory network sharing

and because unbundling is a key component of the EU’s general response to net neutrality, the second part of the

paper uses a new dataset to test empirically the effects of unbundling on investment in fiber-to-the-home.

The net neutrality debate began in other countries much later than it began in the U.S. Most European countries

embrace the general idea of net neutrality. While they address the issue differently, most have so far stated that

unbundling combined with rules governing firms with significant market power, rather than specific net neutrality

regulations, are sufficient. Table 1 highlights some key information about the net neutrality debate in Europe, while

the rest of this section discusses the EU, member countries, and Japan and South Korea in more detail

In sum, it is not clear that Europe’s approach to net neutrality – encouraging unbundled networks – will do much to

facilitate neutral networks. Moreover, the cost of that neutrality appears to be significantly less investment in

next generation networks.

2. The mobile web has added a new dimension to the Net Neutrality debate. If mobile users can access the Internet

through their smartphones, should Net Neutrality concepts be extended to include cellular networks and mobile

service providers?

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is voting to decide if to keep net neutrality regulations in place, and

getting rid of these rules which were enacted in 2015 by the Obama administration would mean allowing Internet

providers to control what content you can and can't access and at what speeds. For many, this is concerning for lots of

reasons, but one that might stand out is Surfing the web, using Facebook, or online shopping could soon be completely

different.

Now the agency is changing its mind, applying the same rules to both types of service. Critics say that's a mistake that

the arguments that persuaded the FCC to exempt wireless networks from regulation five years ago are still valid today.

If they're right, the new rules could hinder innovation in the wireless market the exact opposite of what they're

supposed to accomplish. Technically speaking, residential broadband is relatively simple. Internet access is delivered

over a cable that runs to the customer's home, and customers can rely on a stable amount of bandwidth Wireless

networks are different. The capacity available at any given time depends on many factors, such as a smartphone's

location, the frequencies it is using to communicate, how recently the nearest cell phone tower has been upgraded,

and other factors.

Mobile Internet has, indeed, brought the issues of 2003 back into play, under the cover of a new technology. Access

restrictions to certain protocols, such as Voice over IP, and other limits are officially justified by a poor allocation of

band frequency, but they owe much to industrial battles. Not only are debates, conflicts between business models and

court cases related to net neutrality becoming more and more frequent, spanning industrial sectors, political institutions

and judicial venues they have crossed the borders of the United States and have now acquired a more international

dimension, not unlike the Internet itself.

3. Do some research related to how Net Neutrality has contributed to Internet commerce and online economies. Is

network neutrality essential for the continued expansion of online commerce? Why or why not? Justify your answer.

Net neutrality protects the freedom of users when accessing the internet whicheams that all the information over the

net is treated equally and is available to everyone for a equal price. This provides equal chance of every company to

promote their information. If it is repealed then ISP will favor certain companies that is willing to pay more to get to

the consumer faster and first and smaller companies with less money will have to deal with slower speed. This will

lead to expansion of big companies even more while decreasing the chance of new and small companies even further.

So in my opinions, internet should be free and so that everyone has the equal opportunity.

Do you think that Net Neutrality must be maintained to protect freedom of speech and/or preserve democracy? Why

or why not?

Network neutrality refers to the principle that Internet service providers (ISPs) should allow access to all online

content and applications regardless of the source, and without favoring or blocking particular websites or products.

It calls for ISPs to treat all Internet traffic the same way, and to not give faster access to websites or users that can

pay extra for prioritization.

Thing is, for many people the internet is just another way to make money, and not just in the way of writing up

reviews or selling books. For internet service providers it’s a commodity that they can sell. You subscribe to a plan,

they give you the web: simple as that. A smart CEO, however, is always on the lookout for new ways in which they

can maximize revenue and profit.

“The UN recognizes the global and open nature of the Internet as a driving force in accelerating progress towards

development in its various forms,” the resolution stated, adding that any human rights practiced ‘offline’ must be

guaranteed ‘online’ as well. The UN has solicited all states to ensure their citizens can exercise their human rights

and fundamental freedoms on the Internet, as well as to ensure accountability for violations and abuses of these

rights and freedoms.

Under the current net neutrality rules, broadband providers like Comcast and Charter, and wireless providers like

AT&T and Verizon, can't block or slow down your access to lawful content, nor can they create so-called "fast

lanes" for content providers who are willing to pay extra. In other words, your internet provider can't slow your

Amazon Prime Video stream to a crawl so you’ll keep your Comcast cable plan, and your mobile carrier can't stop

you from using Microsoft’s Skype instead of your own Verizon cell phone minutes.

Without net neutrality, the internet as we know it will not exist. Instead of free access, there could be “package

plans” for consumers. Lack of net neutrality, will also spell doom for innovation on the web. It is possible that ISPs

will charge web companies to enable faster access to their websites. Those who don't pay may see that their websites

will open slowly. This means bigger companies like Google will be able to pay more to make access to YouTube or

Google+ faster for web users but a startup that wants to create a different and better video hosting site may not be

able to do that.

Reference: Flynn, B. (2002) “Consumer Broadband Services in Sweden: Lessons for the UK Broadband Market,” Digiscope AB. A Presentation in Mediacast Conference 2002, London.

Garcia-Murillo, Martha and David Gabel (2003) “International Broadband Deployment: The Impact of Unbundling,” Paper presented at the 31st Telecommunications Policy Research Conference: Arlington, VA.

Henseler-Unger, Dr. Iris (2007) “Network Neutrality: Regulation and Policy,” WIK-Conference: Network Neutrality – Implications for Europe: Bonn, Germany, December 3-4.

Hermalin, Benjamin E. and Michael L. Katz (2007) “The Economics of Product-Line Restrictions with an Application to the Network Neutrality Debate,” Information Economics and Policy, 189: 215-248.