Net Neutrality’s Comeback
Does new administration mean that net neutrality is back?
Led by Mozilla, internet companies are banning together to push the FCC to reinstate net neutrality rules that were previously repealed under the Trump administration. In a letter for the FCC, companies Dropbox, Eventbrite, Reddit, Wikimedia, Vimeo, and Mozilla wrote:
“By using its authority to restore net neutrality at the federal level, the FCC can help protect families and businesses across the country that rely on high-speed broadband access and help spark our recovery.”
The companies stated that net neutrality is “critical for preserving the internet as a free and open medium that promotes innovation and spurs economic growth.”
What is net neutrality?
Net neutrality is the idea that internet service providers should treat all internet traffic and communications equally, and should not favor or discriminate against particular websites or apps based on content, users, platform, etc. Net neutrality was first instated under the Obama administration by reclassifying internet service providers as common carriers under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934. By reinstating them as common carriers, as opposed to information services under Title I of the act, they became subject to regulation under the FCC. This rule was quickly repealed by the Trump administration in 2017.
Net neutrality promotes accessibility to the internet for all individuals and allows for smaller companies to enter the market, reducing the monopoly that large companies such as AT&T, Verizon, and Comcast have over the internet.
Some states have already taken net neutrality into their own hands
California recently passed its own net neutrality law as a response to the roll back of the federal guidelines.
Although most internet providers have not made significant changes to their policies since the change was repealed, the California law has a direct impact on AT&T, who had taken advantage of the repeal. Not only was AT&T capping its user’s broadband usage, the company was not including it’s own streaming apps in that cap, essentially playing favorite with its own content. The California law forces the company to roll this back.
Other states such as Oregon, Washington, and Vermont have also passed their own net neutrality laws. While these state’s legislation shows progress towards defending the open internet, a state by state approach is not a sustainable solution. The internet does not know state borders and having differing laws across states just creates even more confusion for customers.
COVID-19 has amplified the need for net neutrality
The ongoing pandemic has amplified the need for net neutrality. As workers, educators, and students shifted to working from home, the need for equal access to the internet became extremely apparent. We are now more than ever reliant on the internet to earn a living, ensure the education of our children, and even connect with loved ones. We rely on the internet to disseminate news to keep us informed and to connect with health providers to keep us healthy and safe. The internet needs of a kindergarten teacher working from home vs. a doctor seeing a patient over telehealth are very different, and access to the application and platforms that they need should not be restricted. While YouTube may be a distraction for a middle school student, it may be essential for a developer trying to complete a project.
Those who argue against net neutrality often site internet slow down as an argument. However, as illuminated in the below article, during a time when internet usage surged higher than ever, that slow down did not occur.
Where do you stand on net neutrality?
