Monday, June 25, 2012

My Take on Net Neutrality (from 2006)


Net Neutrality vs. Packet Priority

Recent letters and TV advertisements have presented net neutrality in terms of cost to consumers.  Indeed, most consumers are probably only aware of net neutrality as an abstraction related to the cost of upgrading the internet.  The real story merits everyone’s attention beyond the threat of higher prices.

The existing alliterative title could be renamed “content neutrality.”  It really means that the internet itself is blind (or neutral) to what data (or content) is being transmitted.  When you go to any site of your choice now, the site provides the data and pays for the access speed from their end.  The consumer initiates the transmission of data and pays according to the speed of delivery.  This process is independent of the content being transmitted and all data is treated equally regardless of its source or destination.

Ultimately, ISPs are looking for the chance to bill the content providers not only for the speed of transmission but also for what is being transmitted.  ISPs want web sites to pay extra to prioritize data packets for high speed.  If ISPs get their way, even though you and your favorite web sites pay premium prices for broadband, many of those same sites will be relegated to dial-up speeds because their data is of lower priority than the bigger companies who pay more.  Sort of like if we were all diverted to one congested lane on the highway while the Wal-Mart trucks zoom by in the open lanes.

Ensuring net neutrality means that you get the speed and access that you pay for instead of what your ISP finds financially convenient to provide.  On the other hand, allowing service providers to assign packet priority will stifle web content and provide a potentially sinister means to control information.

No comments:

Post a Comment