Net Neutrality: A must in a free society Joseph Haynes Greg Belle Nick Dzierzeski
Definition of the Internet A system connecting networks around the world using TCP/IP, which stands for Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol, a set of standards for transmitting and receiving digital data. The Internet consists primarily of the collection of billions of interconnected computers (Economides 2008).
How the Internet Works As you can see, your ISP is what connects your computer to the internet, which other computers and servers connect to via their ISP. There are several ways to connect to the ISP, which include using a dial-up modem over a phone line, cable, or satellite.
Definition of Net Neutrality Net Neutrality is a network design paradigm that argues for broadband network providers to be completely detached from what information is sent over their networks.
This chart shows the world’s Internet restrictions. Internet black holes mean that data information is really sucked up in a void meaning that it is there but it will just keep coming and coming. A lot of smaller under developed countries surveillance their Internet like Iran that blocks twitter feeds because of the recent Iran elections. Some countries as you can see have minor or no restrictions on the Internet.
Our Stance on Net Neutrality We, as a group, are for net neutrality, keeping the internet the same as it was since its inception.
Table of Contents • History of the Internet • History of Net Neutrality • Seven Reasons Why the Internet should be Neutral • Politics and Net Neutrality • Economy and Net Neutrality • Religion and Net Neutrality • Philosophy and Net Neutrality • Culture and Net Neutrality • Legality and Net Neutrality • Arguments against Net Neutrality
History of the Internet • In 1934 the Communications Act became law. First attempt to regulate phone lines by FCC. • Vannevar Bush first proposed the basics of hypertext in 1945. • In 1958, Bell System announced its Data Phone service using regular phones circuits (Anderberg 2007). • In 1962, DARPA lead the way in developing the Internet.
History of Internet Pt. 2… • In 1969, the network known as ARPANET was created to connect 4 databases owned by universities in the southwestern U.S. • In 1989, the Internet grew in popularity as its host amount breaks 100,000. • Hypertext Markup Language (First Version of HTML) was formally published on June 1993. • In 1994, the Internet grew by 341,634%
History of Internet Pt. 3… • In 2003, the phrase “network neutrality” was coined when Law Professor Tim Wu presented a paper at the Silicon Flatirons conference in Boulder Colorado. • In 2004, the FCC gained control of the telecommunication industry, introduced the “Four Freedoms” • In 2006, Net Neutrality hit mainstream with the musician Moby appearing at a Capitol Hill press conference
History of Internet Pt. 4… • In 2006, a bill was struck down when the House voted 269-152 to reject Representative Ed Markey’s net neutrality amendment to the COPE telecom reform bill, HB 5252. • In 2007, the Internet giant Google finally flexed its muscles with its hiring of former MCI lobbyist Rick Whitt. • In 2008, the FCC made a critical decision when it found by a 3-2 vote Comcast guilty of violating Internet principles. In September of the same year, Comcast filed an appeal to the FCC’s actions.
The Seven Reasons for N.N. • Economic Recovery and Prosperity • Free Speech • Civic Participation • Marketplace of Ideas • Social Justice • Rise of Telecom companies • Political Opportunity
Senator Ted Stevens Senator Ted Stevens (Chairmen of commerce) which means he is in charge of commerce over the internet. He has a limited understanding of the Internet and Net Neutrality (Stevens 2009). John Stewart explains the epic failure that is Ted Stevens: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfga4bFIUoc
Politics & Net Neutrality Most democrats agree with net neutrality and republicans disagree with it. Republicans are telling Obama that net Neutrality laws are harmful (Karr 2009). Let it be known the net was neutral since its beginning. The way the internet is now is the way it always has been. Our stance is it should stay this way.
Economic Contributions Against Net Neutrality These are companies that have shown top contributions of money to representative republican Joe Barton of Texas for fighting against net neutrality. These are the top companies who help run the Internet.
Economics Net Neutrality is the building block of the abundance-based economy on the Internet. Significantly effecting the dollars that we would have back in our pockets, online publishers would, under “Net Neutrality” be able to raise its cost of publishing back to its former level. When Net Neutrality ends, the monopoly begins again. Sites like West Seattle Blog are profitable because of this reason.
Economics Continued.. The nightmare situation of having to pay a company like Comcast to keep the Blog would effectively put the blog out of business. As of now, publishing is essentially free. The only thing that you need is a monthly internet service. If the old economics come back to the forefront, preferential treatment will come from customers who pay. Only larger news organizations would be able to afford the cost of ensuring website in people’s homes (Preston 2009).
Religion & Net Neutrality Relating to the economics of Net Neutrality, the religious aspects of Net Neutrality would be extremely affected if legislation is not passed. • Under the Bush administration, the religious right blog and evangelical social networking lines were withering away. • Without Network Neutrality, leaders of all religions would have harder times reaching out to people outside their normal congregation (Religious 2009).
Religion & Net Neutrality Continued.. • Huge controversy was unleashed when Comcast blocked the King James Bible. Comcast was also accused for suppressing Christians in China by blocking online programs and other organizations from reaching China’s people (Jones 2008).
Philosophy & Net Neutrality • The philosophy of Net Neutrality is broken up into three course beliefs. • First, Digital technology, if unshackled is a powerful means for creating an egalitarian society. • Secondly, the end-to-end design of the Internet is open to innovation. Continued on Next Page…
Philosophy & Net Neutrality Continued. • Third, and lastly, market players should not control the Internet (Cleland 2009). Those who believe in Network Neutrality generally have a strong stance on the freedom of speech. The people on Network Neutrality also want to make it clear that they do not want to force ISP’s to avoid “differentiating” themselves. What they don’t want is for them to do it in ways that is determined “out of bounds” (Anderson 2009).
Culture & Net Neutrality Our culture is a very dynamic one. Throughout the years it has seen many changes; in fact our culture has drastically changed even in the past 100 years. Although many cultural changes are brought about by world events, even more changes are brought by technological innovations, such as the internet.
Culture & Net Neutrality Continued The way our culture communicates has been changed by the internet. Never before has instant communication from countries from all over the world been possible in such a new way. This opens the issue of Net Neutrality with countries who wish to censor or silence their populace.
Culture & Net Neutrality Continued One recent example that immediately comes to mind was the debated Iranian election. Public outrage ensued when Mahmoud Ahmadi Nejad was re-elected in what seemed to be a rigged vote. The public of Iran rushed to the Internet posting pictures and videos from their phones from the protests. This was regarded as one of the first time a major protest was displayed in such a way. Thousands of people in Iran posted up to the minute updates on their “Twitter” pages, detailing police brutalities among other things. This is where net neutrality comes in, as the government started shutting down access to the Internet to quiet the public.
Legal Issues Who has the right to hold the reigns to the Internet? Do the telecommunication companies own the Internet? The answer is no. Telecommunication companies are merely a means to an end. In other words, they are merely the gateway to the Internet; they don’t own the Internet themselves. Telecommunication companies should be concerned with providing the best product to their customers rather than limiting their output. If they decide to change the current system, assuredly the people would not stand for it, nobody wants a regulated Internet (Press 2006).
Legal Issues Continued For fair market competition, internet service providers should be able to facilitate a similar experience for a similar price across the board, otherwise connecting to the internet will become a monopoly scheme directed towards the highest bidding telecommunication company that provides the best plan.
Argument: • Net Neutrality would keep broadband access providers from offering more than one service • Rebuttal: • With Net Neutrality, you are offered a choice. If the internet was not neutral you would be forced to utilize certain products dictated by the service provider, to illustrate this metaphorically, this would be like being forced to use Pepsi or Coke depending on the restaurants (internet service provider) you are utilizing. • But the difference between Internet service providers & restaurants is that you have the freedom to go to a different restaurant or store to obtain your preferred soda. If where you live determines what service provider you use, or if the government of your country is running the internet, there is no where for you to turn to get the products or services you desire (websites, etc.) Arguments Against Net Neutrality
Arguments Against Net Neutrality Continued AT&T claims that 5% of its users use over 50% of the bandwidth. Sandvine reports that over 44% of its Internet traffic comes from file sharing. While these numbers may sound drastic, they still do not justify discrimination on the Internet. Claiming the fears of people to be irrational, those who oppose Network Neutrality do not look at the possible scenarios of a broadband future (Davis 2009).
Concluding Statements In conclusion, the Internet should be a neutral place for all of its users. Not all cars are created are the same, but all should be allowed on the highway. The same is true with Internet traffic. File sharing and increased usage, as well as profits are all issues to the Internet corporations. What this is about, though, is the consumer. It’s the consumer that the corporations should cater too, and it’s the consumer that counts.
Works Cited 1. Anderberg, Anthony (2007). History of the Internet and Web. Retrieved 10/10/09 from http://www.anderbergfamily.net/ant/history/ 2. Anderson, Nate (2009) “Network Neutrality” or “Network Neutering”. Retrieved from http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/09/editorial-network-neutrality-or-network-neutering.ars 3. Cicconi, Jim (2008) Net Neutrality: A Historical Timeline Sidecut Reports. Retrieved 10/10/09 from http://www.sidecutreports.com/2008/11/16/net neutrality-a-historical-timeline/ • Cleland, Scott (2009) Neutralism: Identifying the Commons Ideology behind Net Neutrality. Received from http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=cache%3AAGiK2dDJVsgJ%3Awww.n tcompetition.org%2FNeutralism_the_ideology_behind_net_neutrality.pdf+m aning+behind+net+neutrality&hl=en&gl=us&sig=AFQjCNHiOFb4JPbUKm2I VuRBAxWqgMncA&pli=1 5. Davis, Christopher (2009) Net Neutrality: Good for a few, Bad for most. Retrieved from http://wistechnology.com/articles/6649/ 6. Economides, Nicholas (2008). "Net Neutrality", Non-Discrimination and Digita Distribution of Content Through the Internet* . Retrieved 10/10/09, from aei brookings.org 7. Howe, Walt (2009). A Brief History of the Internet. Retrieved 10/10/09. From http://www.walthowe.com/navnet/history.html
Works Cited 8. Jones, Lawrence (2008) Christian Coalition Backs New Neutrality at FCC Hearing. Retrieved from http://www.christianpost.com/article/20080420/christian-coalition-backs net-neutrality-at-fcc-hearing/index.html 9. Karr, Tim (2009) Seven Reasons: Why We Need Net Neutrality Now. Retrieved 10/12/09 from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/timothy-karr/seven-reasons-why we-need_b_250175.html 10. Kristula, Dave (2001) The History of the Internet. Retrieved 10/10/09 from http://www.davesite.com/webstation/net-history.shtml 11. Lakely, James (2009) The Strange Philosophy Behind the Movement for Net Neutrality. Retrieved from http://www.heartland.org/publications/policy%20studies/article/26061/ 12. Preston, Jason (2009) Why the Future of New Brands Hinges on Net Neutrality.Retrieved from http://eatsleeppublish.com/why-thefuture of- news-brands-hinges-on-net-neutrality/ 13. Singel, Ryan, September 21, 2009 “GOP Senators Move to Stop Obama Net Neutrality Rules” http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/09/republican net-neutratlity-amendment/ 14. (2009) Religious Connections. Retrieved From http://www.baptistplanet.com/2009/09/net-neutrality-and-religion.html 15. March 17, 2009, www.Youtube.com, Ted Stevens Tubes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfga4bFIUoc 16. United Press (2006) Experts speak out against Network Neutrality. Retrieved from http://www.physorg.com/news70725523.html
This graph explains the different bit rates experienced by countries with different laws on net neutrality. Japan, as you can see puts their top priority on the speed of their internet.
This graph shows the growing interest of those seeking the topic choice of net neutrality. The increased awareness caused by celebrities such as Moby have brought it to the forefront. Now, it is the subject of much debate.
As stated previously, the video downloading amount has largely increased with the increase in bandwidth. This graph illustrates the growing demands of the internet and the pressures of companies such as Comcast and AT&T to limit bandwidth usage.
Once again, the failure of the United States to keep a competent, high speed internet is realized. Net Neutrality along with a better broadband infrastructure will help the US compete in the global Internet race.
Effectively showing why those who oppose Net Neutrality are misinformed, daily internet traffic by 95% of internet users falls in the middle of the graph while the remaining few fall below or above in the heavy users area in the top right corner. This shows there is no reason to limit bandwidth. Instead, the United States should build a faster internet that keeps up with the countries demands.
This Verizon ad shows the works of those who seek to limit the amount of internet usage. With the less expensive plan, a small amount of downloadable information is aloud while the more expensive plan offers more but a still limited download plan.
To clear up rumors, this graph breaks down internet usage with the use of a pie chart. The information shows that while fire sharing carries 29% of the usage, this is not a reason to allow companies to sabotage our internet rights.