net neutrality

September 30, 2010

Recently, I contacted my local reprographics center about getting a high-res scan of the cover of a magazine purchased at a newsstand. Not a chance, they have rules, no reproductions without a written copyright release. To my knowledge, there has been no public outcry about this rule at copy centers, but that's not the case on the internet!

The FCC has lined up new rules for the internet called net neutrality. The argument started over a technology called BitTorrent. With BitTorrent, when you download a file, other people doing the same thing at the same time will be downloading parts of the file from your computer/connection in order to free up the host server's bandwidth and protect it from crashing. Quite innovative actually.

The current campaign for net neutrality was inaugurated back in 2007. It branded ISPs as monsters, as people feared ISPs were planning to tier the cost of internet access and restrict access to various content. ISPs were blamed for stifling global innovation and censuring the web.

The unreasonableness only grew from there.

BitTorrent protocols were designed for very large files like movies. Comcast had been tarred and feathered because sometimes it blocked the part when BitTorrent uploads a file from your computer to someone elses. Frankly, there may be instances where this kind of "network management" is appropriate. At least Comcast thought so, they fought and won their FCC court case in April 2010.

However, the battle did not end. Now with wildly-charged emotions and the argument for government-management of the internet introduced, the net neutrality message was significantly overhauled. You guessed it, the new charges are "discrimination!" The proposed legislation addresses discrimination on the part of ISPs on 7 out of 13 pages. No longer a management issue, the Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2009 is effectively human rights law. The FCC's quasi hands-off policy toward internet management will be traded-in for one beset with hard-to-qualify federal regulations.

I pay a tiered price for my ISP service. The "freedom" I want is the right to switch to a competitor when I'm ready. The new rules do nothing new toward that end. Instead they are vague and mysteriously open-ended about future government constraints. Far from preserving my freedoms, the FCC will accomplish little more than the need for my ISP to retain a larger legal team.

Investigate on your own, here is a way to start your own education about net neutrality and the actual legislation.