The Role of ISPs in Providing Internet Access
Discuss About The Hearing Before Committee On The Judiciary.
The Internet is the most extensive publicly accessible network in the world. Connecting to this network is done through service providers called Internet Service Providers, or ISPs. Providers typically provide multiple tiered connection schemes which give a user the ability to take in and send out more information at the same time. This method can be seen just as the current practice of obtaining water from the utility company. The flow information, or data, can be seen as the flowing water to a home. From that point, the amount of water coming into a house can be increased by purchasing a larger inlet pipe from the provider (the United States, 2015). This is the same concept with Internet service providers. Once the water reaches home, it can be distributed and used around the home as much as needed up to the max flow that the pipes allow. This same concept is the same with the Internet. Information flow came into the home and distributed to devices until the “pipe” is full. Internet service providers now want to not only charge for the pipe coming into the home but also split up the types information within the flow into tiered charges as well (the United States, 2014). This is where the idea of net neutrality comes into play. Net neutrality states that the flow from the pipe is a stream of data just like the water is from the water company and should not be filtered to charge for certain types of data coming through. The Internet is a flow of information and should not be restricted based on the kinds of information coming through the pipes.
Commercialization is intruding virtually in every segment of human life and internet is also not an exception. When the internet was introduced, people visualized or welcomed it as an ocean of free or unpaid knowledge. However, business people quickly realized the vast business potential of the internet and promptly started their efforts to transform internet from a free service to a paid service. Many internet service providers in America like Verizon, Comcast, and AT &T, started to restrict their free internet services one way or other which resulted in the creation of the topic; net neutrality (the United States, 2011).
According to a report by the European Union on Open Internet (“Open Internet | Digital Single Market,” n.d.), Enforcing fees for using some network services is just like restricting the natural right of people to get drinking water. Knowledge is a property which cannot be limited or used for commercial purposes (Musiani & Löblich, 2015). It should be remembered that what would have happened, had our ancestors try to hide their knowledge instead of distributing it freely to the future generation. What would have happened if the inventor of electricity asked for patents or fees for his discovery? Knowledge, technological advancements, innovations, and inventions should be used for the wellbeing of the future generation rather than trying to block it for commercial purposes. It should be noted that if one internet service provider enforces some fees for using some particular service, other service providers will also follow the same path (Stylianou, 2015). Thus, the internet may become another land of competition, and all the malicious activities we are witnessing in the current organizational world would enter the world of the web also. The struggle for dominance or monopoly would force the ISP’s to use all types of profit-making strategies, and the ordinary people may not get comfortable or free access to some of the prominent internet services in future. “Broadband service providers should charge consumers only once for Internet access, do not favor one content provider over another, and do not charge content providers for sending information over broadband lines to end users” (Pouzin, 2015)
The Emergence of Net Neutrality as a Concept
The above example clearly shows that ISP’s can efficiently control internet traffic to conserve their business interests. In other words, they can efficiently provide fast services to some customers (Paid Customers) and reduce the internet speed of other customers (Free customers). In other words, in the absence of net neutrality, there will be two types of internet users; one who can access high-speed internet and one who can access only the low-speed internet (Marsden, 2015). A kind of discrimination can thus enter the world of internet usage. It is just like providing better healthcare to those who are wealthy and providing poor healthcare to those who are poor. The files uploaded by one user are generally downloaded by other users. Non-uniform traffic management in internet services will create a lot of problems in uploading and downloading of files in file-sharing networks. To avoid such ramifications, all the internet should be treated equally to ensure all the users are getting regular access to the internet (In Belli, In De, Cerf, & Pouzin, 2016).
The current world is marching to towards a world of democracy. Many of the totalitarian administrations in Eastern Europe faced destruction in the past few decades and many other Islamic countries under a dictatorship are currently trying to embrace democracy. Even in communist China, the call for equality is strengthening. Human rights, freedom of expression, etc are topics which are getting prominence in the current world. In China, internet contents are censored heavily before displaying it in front of the users and Americans are continually ridiculing the attitude of Chinese administration in preventing or controlling people’s rights of freedom of expression and internet usage (Higgins, Regan, & Lyons, 2017). It should be noted that by allowing internet service providers to function freely, America is also doing the same thing what their Chinese counterparts are doing. The ultimate effects of censoring of information and commercialization of data are the same; the majority of the people will not get the information quickly. In other words, net neutrality is necessary to distribute internet information uniformly to the people (Belli, 2015).
Net neutrality is a hot topic and both sides have valid points for why and why not regarding the method of data distributions. On one side the Internet is seen as a single flow of information. On the other side the service providers see the flow as having multiple types of streams that may or may not need priority over one or the other (Pouzin, 2015). The Internet was originally created to connect as many people as possible and provide a method of getting as much information around as possible. Providers now want to restrict the amount of information that flows into locations unless a premium is paid. Creating these restrictions make the Internet a form of cable TV service where if a user wants to listen to music he or she would have to purchase a music package and if a user wants to surf the web then he or she would have to purchase a web surfing package. This is totally against the ideals of the Internet and why it exists. Companies need to stay neutral just as the water company is neutral (Pouzin, 2015). Allow people to purchase as much as they can consume and not restricts the pipes just because a person may want to install a sprinkler system.
In conclusion, the removal of net neutrality or permitting to the private ISP’s to generate uncontrolled revenue from the internet in the name of quality improvement can bring more harm than the goods. For example, it should be noted that privatization has destroyed American educational systems. Many of the public schools in America were already closed down, and many others are expecting the same fate shortly itself because of stiff competition from private schools. Students from ordinary families are struggling to get a quality education at present.
References
Belli, L. (2015). End-to-End, Net Neutrality and Human Rights. Net Neutrality Compendium, 13-29. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-26425-7_2
Higgins, M., Regan, M., & Lyons, D. A. (2017). Net neutrality.
In Belli, L., In De, F. P., Cerf, V. G., & Pouzin, L. (2016). Net neutrality compendium: Human rights, free competition and the future of the Internet.
Marsden, C. T. (2015). Zero Rating and Mobile Net Neutrality. Net Neutrality Compendium, 241-260. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-26425-7_18
Musiani, F., & Löblich, M. (2015). Net Neutrality from a Public Sphere Perspective. Net Neutrality Compendium, 43-52. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-26425-7_4
Pouzin, L. (2015). Net Neutrality and Quality of Service. Net Neutrality Compendium, 73-78. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-26425-7_7
Stylianou, K. (2015). The Persistent Problems of Net Neutrality or Why Are We Still Lacking Stable Net Neutrality Regulation. Net Neutrality Compendium, 211-229. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-26425-7_16
United States. (2011). Ensuring competition on the Internet: Net neutrality and antitrust. Washington: U.S. G.P.O.
United States. (2014). Net neutrality: Is antitrust law more effective than regulation in protecting consumers and innovation? : hearing before the Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, second session, June 20, 2014.
United States. (2015). Wrecking the Internet to save it?: The FCC’s net neutrality rule : hearing before the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, first session, March 25, 2015.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
