Net Neutrality: Taxing the Internet

From the birth of the Internet, the web has been a relatively level playing field. But soon that may change. The FCC/ Federal Communications Commission has proposed a new set of rules that would affect the web. As a result, this new change would have profound impact on how we use the web. And to be honest, this topic is pretty complicated. But here’s how it basically works.

Right now the Internet operates under what is considered an “Open Internet” format. This means that once you’re online, you have equal access in terms of reaching other networks. There is no additional fee that would need to be paid in order to get to Facebook as opposed to Pintrest or MySpace. And from a provider standpoint, you wouldn’t have to pay extra to publish a service and reach customers. In other words: “you don’t have to ask permission or pay tolls to broadband providers to reach others on the network. If you develop an innovative new website, you don’t have to get permission to share it with the world.”

People in favor of net neutrality believe “ Internet service should operate like electricity. Consumers pay a fee to an Internet service provider (like Comcast and Verizon), and they get equal access to the whole Internet — every website, big and small — without any interference from the service providers.” (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/nov/13/ted-cruz/cruz-net-neutrality-regulations-put-government-cha/).

However the FCC has proposed something like a tax on the Internet. In other words, companies would have to pay for their piece of the Internet in order to reach us, the clients. And the big fear is that if the Internet can be “bought” in chunks, this would leave those with little money locked out of the competition. For example a larger company could easily out buy or monopolize Internet speed that would quickly get content to customers.

If a small business wants to get their content to the client, they would have to put out a lot of money in order to compete at all with larger corporations. And if they don’t have the money, whelp..they’re out of luck.

And on top of this, President Obama has called for “the strongest possible rules to protect net neutrality.” Which includes an insensitive within the Title II of the Telecommunications Act. But in some skewed twist of fate giving more emphasis to Title II would give the FCC more power to regulate prices and other idocincricies having to do with the web. All in the name of protecting Net neutrality as Obama proposed. So as I said, this is a complicated topic.

But some complain that the net isn’t neutral at all. The truth is that any service that gets in good with providers such as Comcast and Verizon gets perks. For example, privileged companies such as Google, Netflix and Facebook access already. And even the fact that there are only two main (high-speed) Internet providers, shows that monopolization is already a reality.

One individual who has been incredibly vocal about the debate on net neutrality is. Tedd Cruz, the senator of Texas. A He describes Net Neutrality as “Obamacare for the Internet”

But is this true? And is it necessarily a bad thing? I really haven’t a clue.

In my opinion, this is a topic that I must wait to see unfold further before butting in. But until then, I’ll enjoy my Internet the way it is.