Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1107304683 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; font-size:10.0pt; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} -->
Net Neutrality is the act of keeping major corporations and big business leaders from privatizing the Internet and charging higher prices to customers for the same service they already receive. It is also defined as, all Internet traffic is to be treated equally and that no website, or content is filtered, altered, redirected, blocked, or blessed with special privileges, which is all dependant on the ownership, source, or destination of the content or website CITATION Fre07 \l 1033 (Free Press Action Fund, 2007).
Network Neutrality affects personal users, small businesses, telephone and ISP companies, and many more. Net Neutrality will ultimately affect how technology is used in the future; it is up to the people impacted by Net neutrality and Congress to ensure Network neutrality is not stripped from the rights of all Internet users.
What Net Neutrality wants to do is stop ISP’s from being able to block selected material. One incident has already occurred with Comcast. Comcast is one of the largest Broadband Internet providers in America today. The Federal Communications Commission put a stop to Comcast’s throttling of certain Internet Data Packets. Comcast debated, they were following proper procedures of traffic shaping. Monitoring of customers’ internet traffic, filtering and blocking certain material based on the type of data, is what they were actually doing CITATION Kra08 \l 1033 (Kravets, 2008). What if Comcast had been wrong on the type of data being sent? What if the data being sent was the transferring of important documents from one company office to another? Comcast blocking those documents would ultimately affect that company and harmfully affect the integrity towards their customer’s. Would anyone want this to happen to them?
Let’s take a look at what may happen if Net Neutrality is thrown out the window. Internet Service Providers (ISP) will have the ability to filter all traffic on the internet; ISP’s will also be allowed to monitor all packets of data and decide which is important and which is not. This is already giving too much control to Internet Service Providers. What if a person wanted to look up a small business website but, the persons’ ISP filters this data packet and re-directs the person to a different website? This would be discrimination. The same reason the civil rights movement was put forth, is the same reason Net neutrality is being put forth. Internet users do not want their website browsing construed by big businesses behind the wheel of their browsing and searching of the Internet. Getting rid of Net Neutrality would give ISP’s the ability to do this.
Larry Dignan wrote a report on net neutrality, listing the possibilities of a non-neutrality internet. In his report, Dignan states that “All Internet traffic is not created equal” CITATION Dig06 \l 1033 (Dignan, 2006). In a sense he is right. Sending an e-mail should not have priority over a medical document being sent to a better equipped hospital for evaluation CITATION Dig06 \l 1033 (Dignan, 2006). But one thing Dignan fails to mention is how many different protocols are in use today, and some that are not even used at all. These hardly used protocols and the unused protocols can be used for the types of services that require high priority. What also can be done is separate the different protocols in priority based categories. There must be a line drawn between what is important and what is not. In other words, reserve certain protocols, like the protocols not in use, only for important data like medical documents, and internet based surgeries.
Dignan also claims VOIP will be affected significantly by net neutrality, reducing the quality of internet based phone calls CITATION Dig06 \l 1033 (Dignan, 2006). Like stated above, VOIP uses a different protocol than e-mail, peer2peer transferring and other everyday data transferring protocols. CITATION ND08 \l 1033 (VoiP Protocols, nd). Thus, net neutrality will not affect the quality or the necessary bandwidth needed for VOIP phone calls.
Providers of VOIP technology, like Vonage and Skype, are concerned about the Internet being in the hands of the ISP’s. Who is to say that The ISP’s who also provide VOIP services, will not be discriminatory towards the independent companies by slowing their bandwidth use down to a craw in order to persuade the users to switch to the same service they provide CITATION Sco06 \l 1033 (Scoblete, 2006). Net Neutrality will protect independent companies from being over powered by ISP’s and deep pocketed companies who offer the same services the independent companies offer.
In an article by Jon Stokes, he talks about an incident that took place by AT&T which states:
“FCC Commissioner Michael Copps, fire-breathing advocate of network neutrality regulation and opponent of media consolidation, has taken a stand on AT&T's now infamous censorship of Pearl Jam front man Eddie Vedder's anti-Bush remarks at Lollapalooza. In an interview with OpenLeft.com's Matt Stoller, Copps supported the idea that there's a link between AT&T's deletion of Vedder's political comments from a webcast of the concert and the network neutrality fight that's brewing in the halls of Congress” CITATION Sto07 \l 1033 (Stokes, 2007).
As stokes reports, AT&T deliberately blocked the comment on a webcast. Why they decided to block it is outlined in an article written by Nate Anderson which states:
“AT&T made the decision to silence them, apparently believing that they would prove offensive to listeners.” CITATION And07 \l 1033 (Anderson, 2007).
This bold move pulled by AT&T is an example of what an ISP is capable of doing with their power of controlling content. Without any type of legislation, this can only get worse. Legislation is already in place for discrimination acts like this, which is the first amendment, freedom of speech. Speaking of amendments and laws, what about Privacy?
Everyone has a right to privacy, whether it is health records, therapy sessions, and even lawyer consultations; they are all protected under privacy acts. Personal internet usage information is no different than this. But, ISP’s feel they are not susceptible to the same terms. This has been proven already in cases where ISP’s have used the technology called DPI or deep packet inspection to filter internet traffic. What this means is, ISP’s are capable of inspecting every packet of information that passes through their servers in real time CITATION And08 \t \l 1033 (Anderson, 2008). DPI technology is a powerful tool but, in the wrong hands can compromise personal information of millions of internet users. With the Internet being privatized and in the hand of ISP’s, who is to say, the ISP will not sell this information to advertisement companies? There must be some type of regulations and laws to protect Internet users from this type of privacy invasion. In fact, there are laws against this already; "Regulators need not regulate anew to prevent the worst ISP monitoring abuses, because these acts are probably already illegal under the American wiretapping laws," Ohm says.” CITATION And08 \t \l 1033 (Anderson, 2008).
It’s turning into ISP’s acting like “Big Brother” to users of the Internet, watching every move, taking notes, and stepping in as a type of mediator. Without the interference of the Government and the FCC, and not having Net Neutrality in full swing, cases start appearing where companies have used the technology Deep Packet Inspection in ways that would invade privacy laws. The company Neubuad was using DPI in order to Create profiles and logs of internet user’s habits, and used the information to deploy ads CITATION Tim08 \l 1033 (Timmer, 2008). DPI does have positive uses but without any type of regulation from the government and the FCC, DPI can be used to violate personal rights of internet users.
The reason why Deep packet inspection is being brought up is because of the uses of DPI technology. The only part of a data packet, that needs to be looked at, is the header information. With the header information, the data packet is able to be delivered to the correct location. DPI however, can scan the entire packet and determine exactly what the data is, and figure out its use CITATION Tim08 \l 1033 (Timmer, 2008). The only people to benefit from inspecting a packet at this level are ISP’s and advertisers. Net Neutrality will ensure ISP’s are prohibited from using such technology to filter internet traffic as a means of re-directing traffic to favored sites, or even worse, giving this information to advertising companies responsible for spam mail and pop-ups.
Scott Cleland, who works for ISP’s had to disagree with the above claim. He accused Google and Yahoo, (which are fighting for Net neutrality) of playing on the same ball field CITATION Tim08 \l 1033 (Timmer, 2008). Cleland just so happened to not mention that ISP’s intercept all internet traffic. Google and Yahoo only get their information when a user chooses to use their services, or search engine, which is a big difference. On one hand the person has no clue, and on the other, the person knows and has the ability to choose whether to use that service. ISP’s will definitely benefit from DPI if they are allowed to continue using it.
Companies like AT&T are complaining about having to transfer large amounts of data for companies like Google and Amazon on their networks CITATION Ras06 \l 1033 (Rash, 2006). This is another reason they want to make a non-neutral internet. The ISP would then set up different access levels to prioritize the internet traffic. Large corporations that can afford the faster level will have their content delivered quicker. Small businesses and startup websites will suffer from being stuck in a slow lane from not being able to pay the hefty fees for the faster services CITATION Ras06 \l 1033 (Rash, 2006). From this, first time business starters will have a harder time being able to keep up with the bigger businesses. But with net neutrality, this can all be avoided as all traffic would be equal.
What is to become of future Technology? Where will the Internet stand in ten years, and how will the vote of Congress on Net Neutrality bills, effect the internet and future technology? Taking a stand against the big ISP corporations, and the lobbyists determined to privatize the Internet, will, indeed, determine these important factors of the future to come; and It all comes down to the individual word of the average, everyday internet user, to ensure Net Neutrality is here to stay.