Net NeutralityCOMP 380 Presentation

Alex CookPrince Yabani

What is Net Neutrality• A. Sen. Ted Stevens plan for the

Internet, which is a “not a big truck.”• B. The idea of having fair routing of

information on the Internet• C. A program designed like a net to

capture more information from the Internet

• D. Fishing nets that do not discriminate

What’s going on here?• Idea of “Net Neutrality”

– Free information for everyone• “Net Neutrality” regulations• Key terms:

– Packets– Quality of Service– Latency

Complicated topic• Not an issue back in the good ol’ days

of the Internet• Some of the original legislation

proposed came from bipartisan sponsors

We’re going to each argue a position on the regulations to show what is at issue

Regulations are good!• Net Neutrality will promote healthy

economic/business competition. • Small businesses will be muscled out, by not

being able to afford tiered services. • Lack of business competition reduces good

quality • A free and open Internet will level the playing

field for businesses to compete. • The consumer is able to choose the product

they want with a free and open internet.

Innovation• Tiered internet will stunt economic growth

and stifle innovation. • Tiered internet will add extra cost to online

businesses: cost that will be transferred to consumers.

• Upstart innovators will be shut out. Innovations like eBay, Google, MySpace, Facebook and YouTube wouldn’t exist without an open and free internet. These websites came from humble beginnings.

Net Discrimination• Tiered internet will bring problems of

discrimination. • When network companies have the liberty to

choosing to make certain data low-priority, there is nothing really stopping them from discriminating for social, economic or political reasons.

• This in unfortunately not hypothetical. It has happened before.

No regulations!• They sound like a good idea• “People only object to a “two lane”

highway until you point out one slow lane for everyone isn’t any better.”

• Some data shouldn’t be treated equally. Yes, you read that right.

Risks and consequences• Some people argue that “prioritization is just

another word for degrading your competitor,” Gigi B. Sohn, president of Public Knowledge.– That isn’t a fair representation of what is

happening.• If there were abuses, then regulate. It’s not

needed now.– Madison River Communication, ISP in North

Carolina– Vonage, FCC fines

The “little guy”• What if larger

companies can buy a better QoS agreement?

• An ISP that decided to start messing with who gets a decent connection would be committing market suicide.

Well intentioned, but…• Some of the people proposing Net

Neutrality regulations do not fully understand the technology or the consequences of the regulations.

• Video• Data discrimination isn’t real

discrimination.

Mutual agreements• Information should be easily accessible

by anyone with an Internet connection• QoS “payola” cannot be allowed• If ISP’s start abusing power, then

something should be done• Don’t make it a partisan issue

Questions?