Difference between revisions of "Net Neutrality"
(added intro issues and links) |
m (→The Issues: oop) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
== The Issues == | == The Issues == | ||
| − | (Quoting FTC) Issues are raised by recent legal and regulatory determinations that providers of certain broadband Internet services, such as cable modem and DSL, are not subject to the Federal Communications Commission’s common-carrier regulations. In the absence of such regulations, some have raised concerns about broadband Internet service providers discriminating against, degrading, or blocking users’ access to unaffiliated content and applications. In addition, concerns have been raised regarding ISPs and other network operators charging providers of unaffiliated content and applications fees for prioritized delivery of their products to end users. To prevent harm to competition and consumers from these and other related types of conduct, some have advocated network neutrality regulation | + | (Quoting FTC) Issues are raised by recent legal and regulatory determinations that providers of certain broadband Internet services, such as cable modem and DSL, are not subject to the Federal Communications Commission’s common-carrier regulations. In the absence of such regulations, some have raised concerns about broadband Internet service providers discriminating against, degrading, or blocking users’ access to unaffiliated content and applications. In addition, concerns have been raised regarding ISPs and other network operators charging providers of unaffiliated content and applications fees for prioritized delivery of their products to end users. To prevent harm to competition and consumers from these and other related types of conduct, some have advocated network neutrality regulation that would require equal treatment of all Internet traffic. |
In response, opponents of network neutrality have argued that such regulation would have adverse consequences for innovation and competition in the market for broadband access by, among other things, making it more difficult for ISPs and other network operators to recoup their investments in broadband networks. Opponents also have argued that such regulation is unnecessary because: 1) to date there is insufficient evidence of harm to competition or | In response, opponents of network neutrality have argued that such regulation would have adverse consequences for innovation and competition in the market for broadband access by, among other things, making it more difficult for ISPs and other network operators to recoup their investments in broadband networks. Opponents also have argued that such regulation is unnecessary because: 1) to date there is insufficient evidence of harm to competition or | ||
consumers to warrant such regulation; 2) competitive conditions in the market for broadband access will protect consumers from the harm anticipated by net neutrality proponents; and 3) the antitrust and consumer protection laws, as well as FCC oversight, are sufficient to address any harms that may arise. | consumers to warrant such regulation; 2) competitive conditions in the market for broadband access will protect consumers from the harm anticipated by net neutrality proponents; and 3) the antitrust and consumer protection laws, as well as FCC oversight, are sufficient to address any harms that may arise. | ||
| − | |||
== Links == | == Links == | ||
* Wikipedia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality Network Neutrality] | * Wikipedia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality Network Neutrality] | ||
Revision as of 14:18, 17 February 2007
Introduction
At the isoc-ny AGM on Feb 15 2007, Seth Johnson reported on his attendance at the FTC network Neutrality (NN) Workshop[1] earlier in the week. He mentioned that there were two weeks left for public comment. It was decided that isoc-ny should issue a comment. Danny Younger and Joly MacFie were tasked with drafting such.
The Issues
(Quoting FTC) Issues are raised by recent legal and regulatory determinations that providers of certain broadband Internet services, such as cable modem and DSL, are not subject to the Federal Communications Commission’s common-carrier regulations. In the absence of such regulations, some have raised concerns about broadband Internet service providers discriminating against, degrading, or blocking users’ access to unaffiliated content and applications. In addition, concerns have been raised regarding ISPs and other network operators charging providers of unaffiliated content and applications fees for prioritized delivery of their products to end users. To prevent harm to competition and consumers from these and other related types of conduct, some have advocated network neutrality regulation that would require equal treatment of all Internet traffic.
In response, opponents of network neutrality have argued that such regulation would have adverse consequences for innovation and competition in the market for broadband access by, among other things, making it more difficult for ISPs and other network operators to recoup their investments in broadband networks. Opponents also have argued that such regulation is unnecessary because: 1) to date there is insufficient evidence of harm to competition or consumers to warrant such regulation; 2) competitive conditions in the market for broadband access will protect consumers from the harm anticipated by net neutrality proponents; and 3) the antitrust and consumer protection laws, as well as FCC oversight, are sufficient to address any harms that may arise.
Links
- Wikipedia Network Neutrality
- Wikipedia Network neutrality in the United States
- www.dpsproject.com Seth Johnson's arguments including a proposal[2] for legislation.
- Cerf vs Farber: the Great Debate mp3 Comments: [3] [4]
