Net Neutrality by Suhail Attar

New York Institute of Technology
Net Neutrality
The Perspectives of Key Players in the Issue.
By Suhail Attar
IENG 485 Seminar Project
Dr. Heskia Heskiaoff
December, 15, 2014

Attar,1
Table of Contents
Abstract............................................................................................................................................2
Introduction......................................................................................................................................2
Defining the Internet.................................................................................................................2
The Internet Function. ..............................................................................................................4
Net Neutrality Explanation.......................................................................................................4
The Perspectives ..............................................................................................................................7
The Individual Supporters........................................................................................................8
Major Websites.......................................................................................................................10
Verizon.. .................................................................................................................................13
Governments Stands...............................................................................................................14
The European Union..............................................................................................14
Brazil’s Approach..................................................................................................14
The USA Government Stand... ..............................................................................15
The Federal Communication Commission.. ..............................................15
A Hybrid Solution a Wholesale, and Retail...............................................16
Obama’s Comment... .................................................................................18
The Republican and Opposition Response... .............................................19
Conclusion..............................................................................................................................21
Works Cited............................................................................................................................24

Attar,2
Net Neutrality
Abstract.
Net Neutrality has become very popular this time, and it is one of the issues that is being
heavily discussed by so many sides whether individuals, large and small organizations, and
governments. Supporters say it is very important to keep the innovative flow of the internet, while
opponents claim it is an illegal regulation and carries on some issues regarding the economy.
Between all of these people the principle of Net Neutrality tries to take place to and challenge all
the sides opposing it. This research paper will give a proper idea about the principle and other
issues that are surrounding it. The paper is focused on the United State of America, yet it gives an
idea about some other parts of the world.
Introduction.
Defining the Internet
In addressing the issue of Net or Internet Neutrality, defining the Internet becomes
necessary. According to an information document made by the World Telecommunication/ICT
Policy Forum titled Defining The Internet, the definition of the Internet is divided into two types
of definitions one is, “the narrow definitions,” and the other is, “the broad definitions.” One of the
narrow definitions is the proposed Russian Federation one that states “An international
conglomeration of interconnected telecommunication networks which provides for the interaction
of connected information systems and their users, by carrying their traffic using a single system of
numbering, naming, addressing, identification, protocols and procedures that is defined by Internet

Attar,3
Standards.” 1
This definition is describing the Network rather than what is the Internet as a whole,
which is why it is considered narrow. A broad definition is the 1995 USA FCC one, stating
“the global information system that:
(i) Is logically linked together by a globally unique address space based on the Internet
Protocol (IP) or its subsequent extensions/follow-ons;
(ii) Is able to support communications using the Transmission Control Protocol/Internet
Protocol (TCP/IP) suite or its subsequent extensions/follow-ons, and/or other IP-
compatible protocols; and
(iii) Provides, uses or makes accessible, either publicly or privately, high level services
layered on the communications and related infrastructure described herein."1
The paper preferred the US definition because it defined the service in general, yet it still contains
a numbers of terms that could out date it in the future if newer technology was developed, but it
may be noticed that it does not go in detail on the idea of public utility, an area that is going to be
heavily discussed in regard to Net Neutrality.
Regardless of all the complication of the details and what needs to be referred to, the
Oxford Dictionary definition seems to be proper as it contains a general idea away from
legislations defining made by regulatory and law official. Oxford Dictionaries define the word
Internet as “A global computer network providing a variety of information and communication
facilities, consisting of interconnected networks using standardized communication protocols.”2
1
Hill, Richard. "DEFINING THE INTERNET." (2013): 2. Print.
2
"Definition of Internet in English:." Internet: Definition of Internet in Oxford Dictionary (American English) (US).
Web. 24 Oct. 2014.

Attar,4
The definition describes the network and the service it is providing, without terms that may make
it outdated.
The Internet Function.
In most areas, the internet functions in a simple way that is divided into three entities. A
very important part of understanding the principal of Net Neutrality, is to know the process that
the internet undergoes to come from one pointe to the other. In fact the whole issue of Net
Neutrality relays on this process. The intent starts from the websites, such as Google and Facebook,
and after that goes to Internet
Service Providers (ISP)
usually communication
companies, but Google
which is a website company
started their own ISP in a
Number of US cities, the last
part of the process is the End
User who are usually people
at their homes or companies.
Net Neutrality Explanation.
Net Neutrality is a very serious issue that is being discussed in many ways, whether the
Law people, the Engineers, the Business people, the Computer people, or any other significant
groups that would have a relation to the issue. Net Neutrality is a concept that Colombia University
Figure 1 Ahmad, Irfan. "What Every Social Media User Needs to Know about
Net Neutrality - #infographic." 1 July 2014. Web. 5 Dec. 2014.

Attar,5
Law Professor Tim Wu developed in 2003 with his paper titled, “NETWORK NEUTRALITY,
BROADBAND DISCRIMINATION,”1
which is a strong title that gives an indication about the
meaning of the concept.
The concept, as it is called in
many cases when being dealt with,
means that the internet has to be neutral
and all websites (data) be treated equally
in a way that information transferred via
the internet has to be delivered in the
same speed, and should not undergo any
type of discrimination against any
websites. The concept can be illustrated
by the idea that internet data can be viewed as packages and all those packages has to be delivered
in the same speed and delivered to the end user in the same time for all websites.2
The idea of the
package may not illustrate the view of the creator of the concept Prof. Wu because in delivering
packages there is the option of paying more to deliver your package earlier. “The promotion of
network neutrality is no different than the challenge of promoting fair evolutionary competition in
any privately owned environment, whether a telephone network, operating system, or even a retail
store.” 1
says Wu in his argument in support of the concept he invented, which shows that he is in
favor of the public utility illustration in his way of reasoning. However, regardless of the argument
all illustrations or examples can in a way give a proper idea of the meaning and the purpose of the
1
Wu, Tim. "NETWORK NEUTRALITY, BROADBAND DISCRIMINATION." J. ON TELECOMM. & HIGH
TECH. L 2 (2003): 141-76. Web. 1 Jan. 2014.
2
Osipova, Natalia, and Carrie Halperin. "How Net Neutrality Works." The New York Times. The New York Times,
15 May 2014. Web. 26 Sept. 2014.
Figure 2 Tim Wu Colombia Law Professor. Vilensky, Mike.
"Ivy League Power Propels Columbia's Tim Wu in Bid to Be
New York's Lieutenant Governor." The Wall Street Journal.
Dow Jones & Company, 27 July 2014. Web. 5 Dec. 2014

Attar,6
concept. For example, the way mostly explained by Net Neutrality supporters is that, “The cable
and telephone companies that control important parts of the plumbing of the Internet shouldn’t
restrict how the rest of us use it.”1
The idea can be further explained by how electricity, water, and
heat come to all homes in the amount consumption of the user, not depending, for instance, on a
certain brand of TV that pays more to the electricity company to have more priority over other
home TV brands. This is what Net Neutrality is about in the eyes of the supporters, focusing in the
idea that the internet must be treated same as those public utilities. Maybe all those idea can
illustrates some of the meanings and how it can apply to the internet, but the internet remains very
special and unique in many ways when comparing it the mailing system or public utilities.
The term itself is not really a scientific term it is a regulatory term or probably a term that
is used for law matters even Prof. Wu himself is a law professor at Colombia University, in which
he created this term in defense of the idea, regardless of the fact that he is not directly involved in
the rule making of the issue.2
This makes this issue a very debatable issue in regard to its relation
to law making with the regulations that may occur, and consequently the shape in which those
regulations would take. The debating may involve many perspectives in dealing with the issue
because it could be seen as a threat to security or information distribution, and many other major
concerns resulting in an endless argument. Therefore, the concept is very much one of those legal
terms that was raised about a decade ago to enforce some regulations in networks and stand against
Internet Service Providers who are in favor of having websites paying for faster delivery to end
users.
1
Sommer, Jeff. "Defending the Open Internet." The New York Times. The New York Times, 10 May 2014. Web.
26 Sept. 2014.
2
Sommer, Jeff. "Defending the Open Internet." The New York Times. The New York Times, 10 May 2014. Web.
26 Sept. 2014.

Attar,7
The Perspectives.
The internet is a very unique place, and it can be very hard to view some areas that are
similar to it, yet the arguments could sound similar to the idea of showing that the internet is similar
to public utilities, or the mailing system which simplifies the ideas. However, the arguments can
have a very wide range of ideas, in why each one of them can validate its point. When viewing the
details of the sides of the argument, the issue becomes complicated, yet each side tries to illustrate
itself with the simplest way possible. For example, the side for Net Neutrality represented by the
big websites such as Google and Facebook, 1
are relating their main idea to the notion that, what
is provided from the internet should have equal opportunity in reaching its end user otherwise the
technology would be very limited that can limit with it many other factors, such as, limiting start
up websites that would have great potential with the neutral status, blocking a very brilliant idea
that may be similar to the social networking ones made by Facebook and Twitter.2
Whereas the
other side, which is very much represented by the popular companies of internet providers who
are also the major cable TV network providers 1
, are trying to make the case that they have the
right to shape the network they built the way they want. These ideas carry a lot within them and
each side can make valid points, which makes it necessary to have a proper explaining to all the
sides.
1
15 May 2014. Web. 26 Sept. 2014.
2
15 May 2014. Web. 26 Sept. 2014.

Attar,8
The Individual Supporters.
One of the major advocates of Net Neutrality is Tim Wu who came up with term in 2003
supporting the idea that internet must be open to and all the data should be treated equally.1
He
could be very much the strongest advocate for the concept he himself created. According to him,
the discrimination in the internet that may happen by the internet providers can be portrayed the
“the same exact way” as when a person buys a toaster from a particular brand and plugs it in the
electricity outlet and find that it is not working properly because another brand of toasters paid
more to the electricity companies, so it can get ahead of the other companies.2
The internet as
mentioned may look similar to some other services, yet it still may have broader specter than many
other places. This is how the supporters of Net Neutrality can simplify their main idea focusing on
the analogy between internet and public utilities by Dr. Wu’s approach focusing on the high level
of overlaps between the internet and specifically the electricity providing service. His main idea
comes when he aims to make the point that a threat to an open internet is a threat to the innovation
that arrived from the fact that it is open.3
The openness that allowed people like Mark Zuckerberg
to create The Facebook, and many others to create innovative websites form their small university
dormitory rooms or privet homes, may be threatened after internet prioritization. The connection
can be drawn between the internet and electricity analogy is by the idea that, going back to the
toaster example, new innovative products would not have the ability to be created if there was
some kind of prioritizing of some brands over others.4
Dr. Wu’s analogy is very much opposing
1
TECH. L 2 (2003): 141-76. Web. 1 Jan. 2014.
2
Knappenberger, Brian. "‘A Threat to Internet Freedom’." The New York Times. The New York Times, 9 July
2014. Web. 10 Oct. 2014.
3
TECH. L 2 (2003): 141-76. Web. 1 Jan. 2014.
4
2014. Web. 10 Oct. 2014.

Attar,9
the evolutionary status that the internet platform would face if it was not neutral, “The argument
for network neutrality must be understood as a concrete expression of a system of belief about
innovation, one that has gained significant popularity over last two decades. The belief system
goes by many names. Here we can refer to it generally as the evolutionary model. Speaking very
generally, adherents view the innovation process as a survival-of-the-fittest competition among
developers of new technologies. They are suspicious of models of development that might vest
control in any initial prospect-holder, private or public, who is expected to direct the optimal path
of innovation, minimizing the excesses of innovative competition.”1
Hence, the idea of the analogy
is to show how prioritization can hurt the innovative process that led to great benefit.
In defending an open internet, there are many issue that are addressed alongside the main
idea. The second major argument is the counter argument made by Net Neutrality supporters,
which is how major network companies clime that since they build the lines that are connecting
the internet, they can have the right to get paid for allowing some websites to go faster. Probably
any type of speed customization they feel right. The strong reply by the supporters according to
Cory Doctorow a digital activist, and journalist is that telecom companies did not just build the
network, nor they own the networks they created because simply they were give subsidiaries by
the public offices in the areas and land they built the network on and are operating over 1
. Cory
says, “The Fact is that they did not just build it because you can’t just build a phone company,
right, if you had to go and pay for like every sq. yard of linear foot that you dug up of every street,
1
TECH. L 2 (2003): 141-76. Web. 1 Jan. 2014.

Attar,10
like imagine digging every road in Manhattan …. it would cost trillions, if you are going to take
public subsidy you can’t draw the line at delivering public benefit.” 1
Major Websites
Wu is not the only advocate for Net
Neutrality, in fact the majority of popular
websites are siding with the open internet and
that issue can be surprising to some who might
think that big websites can benefit from
eliminating new competition, yet when looking
closely this idea might not be true at all because
actually the big internet websites and other
technology companies are benefiting from those
startups because when, for instance, a website or
a smart phone application with a new idea and a
message comes up, a bigger website company
can invest directly in it or even purchase it, such
as Tumbler, that was purchased by Yahoo, also
the same case between Instagram and Facebook.
When it comes to the money issues, generally
1
2014. Web. 10 Oct. 2014.
Figure 3 The Post: Internet Tolls And The Case For
Strong Net Neutrality." Netflix US & Canada Blog. 20
Mar. 2014. Web. 5 Dec. 2014

Attar,11
these website are really not worried that much because they can pay the price for prioritization, yet
their motivations might vary toward the issue.
Netflix is taking a different approach where it is taking the lead of being a strong Net
Neutrality advocate, yet from the sensitivity of their type of service they are in a very hard position
due to the video streaming high level they offer that may face a real hard problem for the lack of
Net Neutrality. On September 2014 Netflix joined a symbolic protest with many other websites
that opens a box on their pages that disturbs the content with a message advocating for awareness
regarding the issue.1
Netflix went ahead and made some deals with internet service provider
Comcast to insure their regular delivery speed and quality.2
The way they are approaching is
through the prioritization as they say, whereas Comcast disagree and view it as, “saying that it
favors net neutrality and that the Netflix agreement is simply a form of payment for transport that
has existed since the Internet began.”2
However, the main talk is the about the issue of, “open
1
Wyatt, Andrew. "Netflix and Other Big Websites Protest Proposed Net Neutrality Rules." New York Times. 10
Sept. 2014. Web. 5 Dec. 2014.
2
Wyatt, Edward. "Obama Reiterates His Opposition to Internet ‘Fast Lanes’." The New York Times. The New York
Times, 10 Oct. 2014. Web. 24 Oct. 2014.
Figure 4 A screen shot of Netflix’s website, which featured a spinning wheel to call attention to the protest
against proposed rules governing net neutrality. Wyatt, Andrew. "Netflix and Other Big Websites Protest
Proposed Net Neutrality Rules." New York Times. 10 Sept. 2014. Web. 5 Dec. 2014.

Attar,12
caching, designed to cache any
type of video on equipment
close to consumers’ homes so it
doesn’t have to traverse the
whole network.”1
This issue
has led FCC Commissioner
Ajit Pai to accuse Netflix of
hypocrisy by creating their own
fast lanes, requiring them to
respond by December 16,
2014.3
Netflix actually chose
this approach to stay a little bid
far from ISP paid prioritization
and try to create some solution
from their algorithm, when they
chose not to join Cisco Systems,
Comcast, Ustream and Yahoo in an effort to increase network capacity to develop video streaming
for the growing demand as many users moves for TV internment to internet internment.2
1
Lawson, Stephan. "FCC's Pai Asks Netflix If It Only Wants Net Neutrality for Itself." TechHive. 2 Dec. 2014.
Web. 5 Dec. 2014.
2
Lawson, Stephan. "Online Video Moguls Team up to Set Standards, Meet Growing Demand." Computerworld. 14
Nov. 2014. Web. 5 Dec. 2014.
Figure 5 Woollaston, Victoria. "Revealed, What Happens in Just ONE Minute
on the Internet: 216,000 Photos Posted, 278,000 Tweets and 1.8m Facebook
Likes." Mail Online.

Attar,13
Verizon along with a number of ISPs.
Verizon is currently the leading name in favor of prioritization and currently the winning
side in the US due the winning of the appeal in Jan, 14, 2014 challenging the FCC rule that intent
has to be open and treated equally by the service providers. 1
The appeal prohibited the FCC to
regulate the internet as such. Verizon position is very ambiguous due to the fact that they claim
they are in favor of the open internet in their comment about the appeal, “One thing is for sure:
today’s decision will not change consumers’ ability to access and use the Internet as they do now.
The court’s decision will allow more room for innovation, and consumers will have more choices
to determine for themselves how they access and experience the Internet. Verizon has been and
remains committed to the open Internet that provides consumers with competitive choices and
unblocked access to lawful websites and content when, where, and how they want. This will not
change in light of the court’s decision. .” 2
However, they are in favor of creating a system where
the end user pays to get the service and the website pays to deliver their service.1
“Verizon wants
a “two-sided market” involving payment for Internet service by subscribers and by companies who
want to reach them, Helgi Walker, a lawyer for Verizon, told the appeals panel.” 1
This standing
is accused of being a threat by Net Neutrality general supporters because they do not see both ideas
going together. Verizon is probably delivering most the provider companies interest because they
all can benefit.
1
Zajac, Andrew, and Todd Shields. "Verizon Wins Net Neutrality Court Ruling Against FCC." Bloomberg.com.
Bloomberg, 14 Jan. 2014. Web. 24 Oct. 2014.
2
Milch, Randal. "Verizon Remains Committed to an Open Internet." Verizon Policy Blog, 1 Jan. 2014. Web. 24
Oct. 2014.

Attar,14
The main point is that the internet is facing increasing traffic and some new ideas has to
come to create order, “Verizon, based in New York, told the appeals court on Sept. 9 that the
FCC’s rules may make it more difficult to manage increasing network traffic, and would damp
investment in more Internet capacity.”1
This point shows the validity of the side, in which
prioritizing can create more order by the creation seriousness in websites creating and not just
filling the internet with worthless websites.
Governments Stands.
The European Union.
The European Union is facing a similar issue as the US, in which they are aiming to make
an amendment that would result in all the member countries to adapt Net Neutrality, yet internet
service providers are fighting this rule. “The European Union is in the process of following the
Netherlands’ lead. On April 3, 2014, the EU adopted a Net neutrality amendment as part of its
larger movement to consolidate the telecommunications policies of member countries. Though the
amendment has yet to take its final form (member states must all review and accept the wording)
the amendment states, ‘traffic should be treated equally, without discrimination, restriction or
interference, independent of the sender, receiver, type, content, device, service or application’.”2
Brazil’s Approach.
The Brazilian approach is one that comes in a strong standing supporting Net Neutrality. It
is not quit similar to any country because of the decentralization of the internet they have, creating
1
2
Walker, Lauren. "How Is Net Neutrality Working for the Countries That Have It?" Newsweek, 10 Sept. 2014.
Web. 24 Oct. 2014.

Attar,15
a unique way of governing the internet. Brazil, which adopted the legislation on April 22, 2014.1
It bars telecom companies from charging higher rates for access to content requiring more
bandwidth, such as movie streaming. It not only limits the gathering of metadata but also holds the
large companies accountable for the security of Brazilians’ data, even if it is stored abroad. This
means websites like Facebook and Google will be subject to Brazil’s laws and courts. The
legislation also establishes that service providers are accountable for content published by users
and must comply with court orders to remove libelous or offensive material.”1
Brazil developed a
constitution or a bill of rights for the internet that will govern the internet as mentioned and strongly
enforce Net Neutrality which is a very creative idea regarding the issue relation to government.1
The idea is very creative, yet in a country like the United States of America it would be very hard
to be taking place, not even a simpler approach because the issue will be needing to be passed by
the congress and then reach a higher level of complication.
The USA Government.
The Federal Communication Commission.
The USA government stand can be represented by
the FCC and not by the congress nor the court because the
court can be identified as a ruling body, which stands by
the law and can change the abilities of the FCC if the proper
legal framework was applied. “U.S. Circuit Judge David
Tatel, writing for a three-judge panel, said that while the
FCC has the power to regulate Verizon and other
1
Walker, Lauren. "How Is Net Neutrality Working for the Countries That Have It?" Newsweek, 10 Sept. 2014.
Web. 24 Oct. 2014
Figure 6 Tom Wheeler. Wyatt, Edward.
"Pressure Mounts on F.C.C. Chief Over Net
Neutrality Rules." The New York
Times. The New York Times, 12 Nov.
2014. Web. 21 Nov. 2014.

Attar,16
broadband companies, it chose the wrong legal framework for its open-Internet regulations,”1
which gives the indication that the government decision is in the hand of the FCC. The way the
FCC can put the legal farm work is to consider broadband carries as common careers under the
Communication Act. “‘Given that the commission has chosen to classify broadband providers in
a manner that exempts them from treatment as common carriers, the Communications Act
expressly prohibits the commission from nonetheless regulating them as such,’ Tatel wrote.”2
As mentioned in the opposition argument from Verizon, the FCC is now fighting for Net
Neutrality packed by President Obama. “President Obama said late Thursday that he was
“unequivocally committed” to net neutrality and firmly opposed to any proposal that would let
companies buy an Internet fast lane to deliver their content more quickly to consumers.”2
Mr.
Obama appointee Mr. Tom Wheeler the head of the FCC is in charge of the rules rewriting which
will fight the Verizon’s appeal, that is very likely to rule in their favor.
A Hybrid Solution a Wholesale, and Retail.
The FCC did not yet come to form a proper way of dealing with the framework issue. After
all, it is very difficult for them to consider everyone’s opinion. However, there is a possibility that
a hybrid solution that would create two categories for internet date, a wholesale one, and a retail
one according to an article in the New York Time, which gave a quite ambiguous explanation of
the newly assumed legal framework.3
“It would apply utilitylike regulation to the wholesale
portion, the exchange of data from the content provider to the Internet service provider for passage
1
2
Wyatt, Edward. "Obama Reiterates His Opposition to Internet ‘Fast Lanes’." The New York Times. The New York
Times, 10 Oct. 2014. Web. 24 Oct. 2014.
3
Wyatt, Edward. "F.C.C. Considering Hybrid Regulatory Approach to Net Neutrality." The New York Times. The
New York Times, 31 Oct. 2014. Web. 7 Nov. 2014.

Attar,17
through to the end consumer. The retail portion, the transaction that sends data through the Internet
service provider to the consumer and which allows the consumer to access any legal content on
the Internet, would receive a lighter regulatory touch.”1
This explanation is making it hard to
distinguish between the two types, and that is due to the lack of comments by the FCC. 1
In depth,
the issue still can be illustrated by the idea of creating a portion of the internet to be considered as
common carriers, in which it will allow the FCC to regulate the wholesale part in a stronger way
to insure an open internet, and the other part is where the companies of ISP can have more freedom
to deal with.1
A more straight forward explanation is the one provided by the Wall Street Journal,
“ ‘hybrid’ proposal, currently being considered by Chairman Tom Wheeler, the plan would
‘separate broadband into two distinct services: a retail one, in which consumers would pay
broadband providers for Internet access; and a back-end one, in which broadband providers serve
as the conduit for websites to distribute content,’ wrote Gautham Nagesh of the Wall Street
Journal.2
This means that the end user is the new victim who would have to pay for the service
which again does not make Net Neutrality enthusiast supporters happy.
The new hybrid solution is did not make a big different to the Net Neutrality because for
Net neutrality supporters by any way and relatively everyone assumed that the proposal is the same
it just changed the word prioritization to specialization probably and changed the money outflow
from the idea of websites paying to the ISP to the one where the end user pays. Even though this
whole proposal is considered a possibility, FCC chairman Tom Wheeler is facing major criticism
for the steps he is making, and that is due to the complication of the issue because there are many
factors that he needs to consider. Also, the way in which these laws are going to take place are not
1
Wyatt, Edward. "F.C.C. Considering Hybrid Regulatory Approach to Net Neutrality." The New York Times. The
New York Times, 31 Oct. 2014. Web. 7 Nov. 2014.
2
"'Emergency' Protests Sweep US to save Internet from 'hybrid' Net Neutrality." - RT USA. Web. 7 Nov. 2014.

Attar,18
easy because what are these types of date that are going to be considered retail, and who gets to
decide that decision. This new idea with its very unappealing suggestion, and all this amount of
complication added to the mean argument, has led to major protests in DC and many other places
around the US, “In DC, protesters stood outside the White House and held up signs that read, ‘Save
the Internet.’ People also coordinated chants like, ‘Hey hey, ho ho, Tom Wheeler has got to go.’”1
Obama’s Comment.
All this talk led President Obama to urge the FCC to stand with the idea of Net Neutrality
for all ends of the service, where the retail and whole sale part get regulated under Title II of the
Communication Act, which means treating the internet as a telecommunication service giving a
utility like status.2
Supporters were again happy, especially that almost 3.7 million people
commented on the issue of Net neutrality when the FCC requested internet used to comment where
most of them were in favor.1
The Internet Association which is a major advocate for Internet
Neutrality made a strong statement supporting Mr. Obamas idea, “The Internet Association
applauds President Obama’s proposal for the adoption of meaningful net neutrality rules that apply
to both mobile and fixed broadband. As we have previously said, the FCC must adopt strong,
legally sustainable rules that prevent paid prioritization and protect an open Internet for users.
Using Title II authority, along with the right set of enforceable rules, the President’s plan would
establish the strong net neutrality protections Internet users require. We welcome the President’s
leadership, and encourage the FCC to stand with the Internet’s vast community of users and move
quickly to adopt strong net neutrality protections that ensure a free and open Internet.”3
The
1
"'Emergency' Protests Sweep US to save Internet from 'hybrid' Net Neutrality." - RT USA. Web. 7 Nov. 2014.
2
Nocera, Joe. "Net Neutrality Rules." The New York Times. The New York Times, 14 Nov. 2014. Web. 21
Nov. 2014.
3
"IA News." Statement on President Obama’s Net Neutrality Proposal. Web. 21 Nov. 2014.

Attar,19
statement was joined by the majority of the internet community represented by the Silicon Valley
internet giants, who preferred not to comment individually on the issue. An article in the New
York Times by Farhad Manjoo tackled the issue of the popular internet response to the president
statement, which evolved the issue in a very fast way, illustrating a new possible approach in
dealing with the issue. “Google, which was once the industry’s most ardent supporter of net
neutrality, and Facebook, which could mobilize millions of supporters through its service, both
declined to comment on Mr. Obama’s position. Instead, they joined a supportive statement put out
by the Internet Association, a trade group that represents a coalition of technology companies,
including Amazon, eBay, Yahoo, Twitter and PayPal.”1
This shows that these companies do not
want to have the lead in this status and want to take a step back, especially that Netflix has already
made deals with ISP.2
The Republican and Opposition Response.
The escalation of the issue was not caused by the president, rather it is the outcome of a series
of events that led the issue to take this new shape. However, the president does not get to decide
for the issue because the FCC is an independent commission, which means the Mr. Wheeler gets
to write the law as he views proper.3 4
The reason Mr. Wheeler is really very incapable of doing
much is because he is placed in a very tight position right now and due to the complication of the
issue does not know how to deal with the issue yet. “Republicans in Congress sent a letter to Mr.
Wheeler on Wednesday saying that reclassifying Internet service as a type of public utility, as Mr.
1
Manjoo, Farhad. "In Net Neutrality Push, Internet Giants on the Sidelines." The New York Times. The
New York Times, 12 Nov. 2014. Web. 21 Nov. 2014.
2
Sommer, Jeff. "A Plumbing Problem for the Internet (and the Stock Market)." The New York Times. The
3
Nov. 2014.
4
Wyatt, Edward. "Pressure Mounts on F.C.C. Chief Over Net Neutrality Rules." The New York Times. The

Attar,20
Obama has proposed, “is beyond the scope of the F.C.C.’s authority.” And the House Energy and
Commerce Committee announced the same day that it would conduct an oversight hearing on Dec.
10 focused on the commission’s consideration of net neutrality rules.”1
This new issue is relatively
going to make a problematic issue for the Net Neutrality supporters because the issue may now be
political and find its way to the Congress, or possibly it may lead to more court problems. All eyes
are directed to Mr. Tom Wheeler who is illustrated as dancing on a tip of a pin as an opinion article
in the New York Times by Joe Nocera in dealing with this issue, where even if the issue goes to
Congress it may not find a solution due to Republican majority, characterized by the letter they
delivered to Mr. Wheeler, notwithstanding 81% percent public support.1 2
“According to the poll,
81 percent of those questioned said they opposed or strongly opposed paid prioritization. The poll,
which has a margin of error of 3 percentage points, found Republicans and Democrats opposed to
the practice in roughly equivalent proportions.”1
The United states repuplican party is also a leading opponent of Net Nutrality as they try
to tripple the FCC response to Obama’s message advocating them to reclassify Internet service as
a type of public utility under Titile II of the Communication Act.3
The three pages letter were sent
to Mr. Wheeler the Chairman of the Fedral Communication Commission by major congress
republicans heavelly critisizing the regulatory approch which will be furthuly illstrated in the
government standings part.2
The idea that the FCC is trying to reclassify the internt twice, so it can
chalenge the veriozon court appeal is an idea that is causing high tention for the Republican Party
1
Nov. 2014.
2
3
"Letter to the Honorable Tom Wheeler." Congress of the United States, 12 Nov. 2014. Web. 5 Dec. 2014.

Attar,21
that they view it as a very harmfull and unnicisarry.1
They calim this amount of regulation will
lead the industry to be returned to the monopoly-era the telephon industry had which will in their
opinion lead to job losses and short invesments.1
This letter carries many valid points especially
when it tries to oppose the idea of classifieing the internt as telecomunication service rather than
an information one. Especially the high level of uncertanty that many companeies such AT&T is
suffuring from in delying major projects due to the legal issues of the case.1
However, it is very hard to take a step back and look at the repulicans yet the issue is
heavelly related to politics due to their relation to Mr. Obama as an opponent in addition to the
anti regulation tenedency they are known for illustrated by the philosophy of small government.
This may give a proper idea way they may be opposing, yet still the points they made are valied
and carries chalanging arguments.
The Conclusion
In conclusion, after all these sides are illustrated, and it can be viewed that Net Neutrality is an
important factor for the flow of the internet, which led to great innovations that generated large
amounts of capital that increased the economies performance in some way. The internet is a unique
place that can’t exactly similar to, a mailing company, an electricity company, a
telecommunication company, nor an average information service. The internet is in a way a multi
functioning platform that can take the shape of a university, a market, a stock exchange, a bank,
or working station for a freelance worker who could be a designer, a writer, or any type of job that
does not require a high level of physical contact. The platform of the internet is very much similar
1

Attar,22
to a virtual world with nearly all kinds services. The sides very much know this very well, yet for
the sake of the argument they might have to simplify it to their prospective.
The supporters of Net Neutrality are very much on the right track when they are standing
against the harm full impact of prioritization. The discrimination will result in a very harmful effect
on the all of the mentioned usages. For example, a freelance industrial designer who is depending
on the internet to show his or her complicated 3D samples that is using a high resolution and other
heavy data to display them, will defiantly suffer from prioritization. The online shopping and E-
commerce area that is being used by a large amount of startup businesses to benefit from the
internet ability to reach for a high number of costumers on a large scale Nationwide and Worldwide
will face a hard time dealing with the issue, and as a result many of such opportunities might not
emerge in a proper shape. This is one of the examples that are very important and it is equivalent
also to the network innovation such as websites and mobile applications.
The idea of Net Neutrality as a harmful regulation is a very wrong idea because the internet in
its neutral state have never made, such big problems as the opponents claim. The idea of a free
market should be applied to the service itself not the service providers. The websites should be the
ones who are enjoying a free and equal market because they are the main part of the equation and
the development of the industry it dependent on them. The idea of politics involved in the issue
made the issue a very ambiguous one because the ISPs don’t have that high level of competition
as the websites between each other. There are only few ones that are available in most regions not
just in the USA but the world as well, which is a very natural issue, resulting in no harm by Net
Neutrality.
The way governments should regulate the internet is by creating separate laws for the internet,
similar to the Brazilian approach. The American approach could very hard one and the result might

Attar,23
take a likely ending under the Title II of
the Communication Act. However, it
might undergo the same issue of court
appeal and start the same argument over
and over again. The act is and out dated
act that needs to be changed.1
The
problem is that it needs to go to the
congress to be changed and that will
take a longer time, even though there is
a majority of popular support.2
The
issue, if treated as such, will be finalized
and the argument can be over for the
side of Net Neutrality.
1
Nov. 2014.
2
Figure 7 Ahmad, Irfan. "What Every Social
Media User Needs to Know about Net Neutrality
- #infographic." 1 July 2014. Web. 5 Dec. 2014.

Attar,24
Works Cited
 Wu, Tim. "NETWORK NEUTRALITY, BROADBAND DISCRIMINATION." J. ON
TELECOMM. & HIGH TECH. L 2 (2003): 141-76. Web. 1 Jan. 2014.
 Osipova, Natalia, and Carrie Halperin. "How Net Neutrality Works." The New York
Times. The New York Times, 15 May 2014. Web. 26 Sept. 2014.
 Sommer, Jeff. "Defending the Open Internet." The New York Times. The New York
Times, 10 May 2014. Web. 26 Sept. 2014.
 Hill, Richard. "DEFINING THE INTERNET." (2013): 2. Print.
 "Definition of Internet in English:." Internet: Definition of Internet in Oxford Dictionary
(American English) (US). Web. 24 Oct. 2014.
 Knappenberger, Brian. "‘A Threat to Internet Freedom’." The New York Times. The
New York Times, 9 July 2014. Web. 10 Oct. 2014.
 Zajac, Andrew, and Todd Shields. "Verizon Wins Net Neutrality Court Ruling Against
FCC." Bloomberg.com. Bloomberg, 14 Jan. 2014. Web. 24 Oct. 2014.
 Milch, Randal. "Verizon Remains Committed to an Open Internet." Verizon Policy Blog,
1 Jan. 2014. Web. 24 Oct. 2014.
 Wyatt, Edward. "Obama Reiterates His Opposition to Internet ‘Fast Lanes’." The New
York Times. The New York Times, 10 Oct. 2014. Web. 24 Oct. 2014.
 Wyatt, Edward. "F.C.C. Considering Hybrid Regulatory Approach to Net Neutrality."
The New York Times. The New York Times, 31 Oct. 2014. Web. 7 Nov. 2014.
 "'Emergency' Protests Sweep US to save Internet from 'hybrid' Net Neutrality." - RT
USA. Web. 7 Nov. 2014.
 Walker, Lauren. "How Is Net Neutrality Working for the Countries That Have It?"
Http://www.newsweek.com/. Newsweek, 10 Sept. 2014. Web. 24 Oct. 2014.
 Woollaston, Victoria. "Revealed, What Happens in Just ONE Minute on the Internet:
216,000 Photos Posted, 278,000 Tweets and 1.8m Facebook Likes." Mail Online.
Associated Newspapers, 30 July 2013. Web. 24 Oct. 2014.
 Nocera, Joe. "Net Neutrality Rules." The New York Times. The New York
Times, 14 Nov. 2014. Web. 21 Nov. 2014.

Attar,25
 "IA News." Statement on President Obama’s Net Neutrality Proposal. Web. 21 Nov.
2014.
 Manjoo, Farhad. "In Net Neutrality Push, Internet Giants on the Sidelines." The New
York Times. The New York Times, 12 Nov. 2014. Web. 21 Nov. 2014.
 Sommer, Jeff. "A Plumbing Problem for the Internet (and the Stock Market)." The
New York Times. The New York Times, 15 Nov. 2014. Web. 21 Nov. 2014.
 Wyatt, Edward. "Pressure Mounts on F.C.C. Chief Over Net Neutrality Rules." The
New York Times. The New York Times, 12 Nov. 2014. Web. 21 Nov. 2014.
 Vilensky, Mike. "Ivy League Power Propels Columbia's Tim Wu in Bid to Be New
York's Lieutenant Governor." The Wall Street Journal. Dow Jones & Company, 27 July
2014. Web. 5 Dec. 2014
 Wyatt, Andrew. "Netflix and Other Big Websites Protest Proposed Net Neutrality Rules."
New York Times. 10 Sept. 2014. Web. 5 Dec. 2014.
 Lawson, Stephan. "FCC's Pai Asks Netflix If It Only Wants Net Neutrality for Itself."
TechHive. 2 Dec. 2014. Web. 5 Dec. 2014.
 Lawson, Stephan. "Online Video Moguls Team up to Set Standards, Meet Growing
Demand." Computerworld. 14 Nov. 2014. Web. 5 Dec. 2014.
 "Letter to the Honorable Tom Wheeler." Congress of the United States, 12 Nov. 2014.
Web. 5 Dec. 2014.
 Ahmad, Irfan. "What Every Social Media User Needs to Know about Net Neutrality -
#infographic." 1 July 2014. Web. 5 Dec. 2014.
 The Post: Internet Tolls And The Case For Strong Net Neutrality." Netflix US & Canada
Blog. 20 Mar. 2014. Web. 5 Dec. 2014

Net Neutrality by Suhail Attar

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (18)

Destacado

Destacado (14)

Similar a Net Neutrality by Suhail Attar

Similar a Net Neutrality by Suhail Attar (20)

Net Neutrality by Suhail Attar