The principle that broadband providers should not be able to discriminate between content on the web when providing a connection is called net neutrality. These companies are in control of which aspects of the internet are available to their customers, because they oversee the 'last mile' of the connection. The practice of discriminating content causes worry when it is used to block out content associated with competing companies or products, thus fixing the market place in the provider's favour.
Some think there should even be laws put in place to ensure that this kind of thing doesn't happen, and this topic is debated, particularly in the US. On the side of net neutrality and the laws that ensure it is upheld, there are many supporters within the industry. Yahoo!, Amazon, Microsoft and Google are a few companies that support the idea, along with individuals such as Tim Burners-Lee (part creator of the web) and Barack Obama.
When called upon to defend net neutrality, people usually cite the principles of freedom and choice that were in mind when the internet was developed. The 'end-to-end principle', which is fundamental to the web, would be violated if someone were to restrict certain information on one end. It is also thought that allowing such techniques to ensure customers buy only the products of the service provider they are with will stifle competition, making it almost impossible for new smaller companies to make an impact on the market.
However, it can also be argued that in not allowing cable companies and ISP's to distribute connectivity in whatever way they see fit, is a violation of their property rights. Also, not incentivising the production of new faster connection technology by not allowing companies to charge more for faster services could mean that the technology stagnates.
With both sides having fairly convincing arguments, it can be hard to make your mind up. However, it seems that most of the opponents of net neutrality (cable companies, ISP's etc.) all have a vested interest in being able to charge for higher speed access - the money they would make from it. Those who are in support of it, conversely, seem to do so from an ideological perspective and for the purposes of preserving the democratic freedom that the internet has come to represent. For this reason, I think it is important that businesses support net neutrality, even if it could mean a lower profit margin.
Some think there should even be laws put in place to ensure that this kind of thing doesn't happen, and this topic is debated, particularly in the US. On the side of net neutrality and the laws that ensure it is upheld, there are many supporters within the industry. Yahoo!, Amazon, Microsoft and Google are a few companies that support the idea, along with individuals such as Tim Burners-Lee (part creator of the web) and Barack Obama.
When called upon to defend net neutrality, people usually cite the principles of freedom and choice that were in mind when the internet was developed. The 'end-to-end principle', which is fundamental to the web, would be violated if someone were to restrict certain information on one end. It is also thought that allowing such techniques to ensure customers buy only the products of the service provider they are with will stifle competition, making it almost impossible for new smaller companies to make an impact on the market.
However, it can also be argued that in not allowing cable companies and ISP's to distribute connectivity in whatever way they see fit, is a violation of their property rights. Also, not incentivising the production of new faster connection technology by not allowing companies to charge more for faster services could mean that the technology stagnates.
With both sides having fairly convincing arguments, it can be hard to make your mind up. However, it seems that most of the opponents of net neutrality (cable companies, ISP's etc.) all have a vested interest in being able to charge for higher speed access - the money they would make from it. Those who are in support of it, conversely, seem to do so from an ideological perspective and for the purposes of preserving the democratic freedom that the internet has come to represent. For this reason, I think it is important that businesses support net neutrality, even if it could mean a lower profit margin.
About the Author:
Do you need to install a BT business phone line? Find out more about business line rental.
0 comments:
Post a Comment