According to Larribeau (15) internet is an expansive tool for doing research, sharing information with people in different geographic regions, and keeping up to date with the current trend in the world. Internet has managed to revolutionize how people communicate as they share and locate information. The electronic mail is the standard of companies use to contact clients as the world relies on the internet so as to ensure efficiency in business.
Historically, Johnson (5) considers the internet as open and free medium while in the present world users of the internet access this facility on an equal basis. Internet began in the military and research centers in the 1960s and evolved into the internet in the 1990s (Kabay 1). Presently, internet is the backbone of global economics and world culture. The internet boasts of unlimited content and a fast speed of accessing and sharing data in disregard of location. Deep battles appear between those in favor of broadband companies and those that are not.
Philosophically, Joch (14) argues that the net neutrality is an ethical platform that describes the standards of internet access. In 2005, the FCC embeds the principles in the policy by encouraging the use of broadband to ensure an open internet. Additional statements in the clause cause controversies currently.
The ones favoring the broadband companies argue that require funds to build networks and laying cables necessary to handle large amounts of traffic. According to Johnson (6), government oversight interferes with smooth internet growth. The original architecture of the internet was by the university and the government while companies such as Google, Apple, and Cisco Systems greatly enhance this service. Democrats who favor net neutrality rules insist that regulation prevent discrimination of different internet service providers.
Network neutrality is a standard that internet service providers together with the government must treat all internet data equally. It should be with no form of bias in user content, object attached, platform, and the application. According to Joch (14) Tim Wu, a Colombian law professor coins the word internet neutrality. Joch (14) says that the network neutrality is a form of internet connection with no additional charge and restrictions.
In a closed internet, the government or corporations restrict what one can say on the internet and charge. Recently, network neutrality attracts debate where some people advocate for rules that work to block certain internet application and protocols. The proponents of neutrality claim that the tiered services will control the pipeline to reduce competition and create uncompetitive services.
Guo and Subhajyoti (141) believe that the net neutrality will preserve the current freedom as the inventors of web protocols had in mind. The opponents of net neutrality claim that the internet service providers do not intend to block the content or lower the internet performance. Guo and Subhajyoti (141) argue that Comcast slows peer-to-peer communication internationally. Other companies use packets inspections to discriminate against peer-to-peer, file transfer protocol and the cell-phone billing system. Kabay (1) criticize net neutrality by mentioning that data discrimination does guarantee quality service. The opponent of net neutrality claims that encouraging competition among the broadband providers will solve the situation of discrimination that has the limitation in many areas.
The development of neutrality predates fierce debate that exists since the telegraph age. According to Guo and Subhajyoti (142), Tim Wu considers network neutrality in relation to application and data. Tim proposes legislation to deal with the sensitive issues that emerge between broadband service providers and the cable companies.
Background of the Study
The issue of net neutrality arguably receives much attention from the public and the researchers of information system. This topic is prone to hotly contested debate by researchers who pursue computer science and law. Some of the research community largely ignores this situation. The debate of net neutrality changes the basic rules of business and access of information due to the use of electronic commerce and the application of internet. Decision taken by the researchers concerning net neutrality will influence information systems in the future.
Approval of a European net neutrality law intention is to prevent internet service providers from blocking operations while enabling ISPs to charge content provides for the service. Critics to this policy cite that the creation of a fast lane internet will undermine the standards of net neutrality since ISPs will not have equality. The European Parliament announces the issue concerning connected continent legislation when it mentions that internet provides will not be able to block internet services or slow web applications of their competitors. Net Neutrality policy prevents telecommunication companies from degrading the internet connections of rival companies. The network operators argue that the restrictions will make management of network unworkable. The consumers have anxiety on whether the policy will translate to efficient services. Guo and Subhajvoti (142) argue that ISPs will offer specialized services of higher quality while not compromising on the speeds of internet. Guo and Subhajvoti (142) say that measures to block or slow a network come from a court order.
Net Neutrality legislation in the EU seeks to ban mobile roaming charges. This policy will protect consumers against abuses from telecommunication companies. The European Parliament requests the commission to highlight exceptional cases for this policy of roaming rules. Critics who oppose this legislation argue through “save the internet” platform that some of the global multinationals such as Face book compete stiffly with the EU. In this case, failure to provide specialized services will lead to the competitors being at the first lane in data highway while the EU start up remain in the slow lane. Save the internet platform argues that this regulation will ensure that the ISPs block the internet with no oversight. This regulation will perpetrate new forms of prejudice while restricting commercial deals.
Johnson (7) attributes net neutrality to Tim Wu the Colombian Professor in Law. Tim Wu designs network rules to prevent internet service providers and the network operators from using their power to control transmission technology. It affects competition in a negative way when markets fail to access applications and content. Those in favor of net neutrality believe in equal public information by treating the content, network, and the sites the same way.
Guo and Subhajyoti (144) point out that the broadband service provider charge the internet users once without any form of discrimination on the content provider on the broadband line. According to Congress, proposals to introduce net neutrality legislation emanate in intense debate.
Anderson (93) argues that the net neutrality seeks to ensure that internet users control the content and applications on the internet. Historically, internet operates using this principle to ensure equal access to all internet users. Broadband carriers should not use their market influence to control and discriminate against competition forces. This principle seeks to control broadband carriers against the use of market power to control internet activities. The emergence of supporters of net neutrality will steer the passing of this legislation to ensure equality and no discrimination. The principle of net neutrality will block, vary the rate of web content. Free and open internet is in line with the observance of freedom of speech that revolutionizes the internet.
The opponents of net neutrality include telecommunications providers such as Verizon and other hardware companies in the cable industries. The former “Hands off the Internet is a website link that brings together all the pro-market opponents to promote their claim against net neutrality. The opponents refute the claim that, in the event, there are no regulations, there would be a disparity on the internet access. In this view, the wealthy would have a faster internet access while the rest of the people use a degraded slow connection (Gilroy 11). The opponents argue that is a false paradigm because net neutrality will only succeed in freezing innovation where the broadband service will offer consumers similar products.
1. Why are the policies concerning Net Neutrality slow to develop?
2. How does the EU’s Digital Single Market plays a part?
Net Neutrality will pertain to the acceptable level of action taken by the Internet Service Providers to enable or restrict access to content and applications
Available document on Net Neutrality from the evidence of (Gilroy 13), (Guo and Subhajyoti 152), and (Joch 14) examines the implications of net neutrality. A significant amount of work was done on the issue using statistical measurement and analysis to satisfy the evaluation. The report of (Gilroy 13) highlights on the emerging issues such as debate on device neutrality, content delivery, and search neutrality and how they shape web traffic changes.
The idea of operating a network with no discrimination is the cause of disagreement with the current FCC policy. According to Guo and Subhajyoti (155) broadband providers both in the traditionally and the modern ones must treat all content equally. It includes Facebook, Twitter, cloud-based activities, Netflix videos, and file sharing activities. This policy will work to ensure that internet users get to run different applications with no content provider with a preferential treatment over the other. In this setting internet, service providers cannot block any content or charge differential rates. FCC drafts an equal basis policy as the standard of the natural feature of the system. Guo and Subhajyoti (155) argue that internet service providers such as Verizon can continue to keep data flowing since they desire to control the traffic by creating faster lanes (Kabay 1). Verizon asserts that the requirement of net neutrality is unconstitutional and once eliminated the economy will present many opportunities to people in this industry. Those in favor of net neutrality do not support this view. Many reports argue against the position of Verizon that seek to overturn net neutrality (Johnson 9). Among those that coined net neutrality, suggest high economic turnover upon adoption of this legislation. Supporters of net neutrality assess innovation possibilities to enable the internet spell out and allow the termination fees (Larribeau 6). The policy perspective of net neutrality applies game theory to evaluate potential consequences of the loss in net neutrality. The research of (Gilroy 31) and (Anderson 96) proves The FCC continues to govern the internet service providers as the court of the Appeals provide. The evidence of Gilroy and Anderson the loss of net neutrality would favor the internet providers while hurting the content providers. This research additionally finds that it is more expensive to expand net neutrality than it is to abolish the rules. Larribeau (6) observes on the existence of the digital divide who upon losing net neutrality can regard information as a luxury due to their social, economic status. Joch (14) and Anderson (95) make an assessment on the growth of data traffic that hinders proper traffic controls. Some proponents to this debate cite of over positioning of the network capacity due to regulations. Regulations can also lead to problems of congestion during peak times
Our research has some points of contact with the channel literature in the supply chains. Several articles investigate the competition between manufacturers and their channel choices. The European communication market is a competitive place. Europeans have a wide variety of broadband internet access. The Digital Single market consists of Key EU policies with the objective to create favorable conditions to cater for growth in EU.
The EU market resembles the Japan market (Joch 14). Countries in Europe rely on the presence of cable television and broadband internet access. France uses intensive regulation to ensure competitive results since it has little cable presence. Germany uses an extensive cable television as the adoption of broadband becomes rapid (Kabay 1). The EU countries experience a robust competition as compared to the European Union. The framework of Net Neutrality in the EU countries applies a competitive broadband to ensure fair competition. The success of competitive alternatives emanates from the European structure that has a pro-competitive way to regulate technology. This structure provides harmony to allow the checking of legitimate differences in the national markets (Johnson 12). The National Regulatory Authorities (NRAs) has discretion of choosing between non-discrimination, cost accounting, and transparent regulation.
This section presents an overview of the methods used in the study. The areas covered in this study include research design, sampling techniques, and data analysis. In designing a methodology for measuring the nature of port blocking to justify net neutrality, we will evaluate different types of measurement such as generality, minimal participation, range, and the quantity. Generality measurement tests an arbitrary internet port that has a 16-bit range such as the HTTP and the SMTP. Range measurement tests a wide area network. The quantity measures many hosts in the network. The Spoofer Project will enable us to test many ports together with the service properties. Our challenge in this work is to deduce the distribution of hosts on the internet and send packets to an alternate port. Our approach applies client participating to enable us attain this goal. The Gnutella permits nodes to interconnect without having limitations. Gnutella has a formation of Super Peers to manage connections. A peer can limit connections in case of data traffic. During a busy response, other peers attempt to use the new node to bootstrap. Nodes make successive attempts to locate a stable link with the peers. In our methodology, we can manage two set of links, the RSP and the measurement host. The Rogue Super Peer connects to the Gnutella to query and respond to the protocol. Upon connection, the RSP advertises its presence to other peers. The RSP can reject the client in a measurement host to correlate connections and block the internet. In a distributed system, an arbitrary redirection of messages takes place due to the HTTP link. The Gnutella that we use is suitable since it facilitates global advertisement. We use the Gnutella network since it exhibits many connections and can redirect them to necessitate the measurement. An SYN sent by the internet users does not contain any data and can drop packets since it bases on the packet inspection. When one client does not need a busy referral message, the system locates another client. Our measurement constructs an accurate picture to block the discriminatory network. The probabilistic inference portrays high probability of blocking network traffic.
In conclusion, the lack of a meaningful competition in providing broadband access in most of the regions in the European Union necessitates monopoly by the broadband service provider. The provider determines the content and the fashion of reaching the on the internet users.This research finds that upon the abolishment of net neutrality ISPs will gain since they gain from this arrangement since they will extract the preferential delivery charge from the content providers. The content providers stand to lose upon the abolishment of net neutrality.Works Cited
Anderson, Byron. "Net Neutrality." Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian 25.2 (2007): 93-98. Print.
Gilroy, Angele A.. Net neutrality background and issues. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 2006. Print.
Guo, Hong, Hsing Kenneth Cheng, and Subhajyoti Bandyopadhyay. "Net Neutrality, Broadband Market Coverage, and Innovation at the Edge*." Decision Sciences 43.1 (2012): 141-172. Print.
Joch, Alan. "Debating net neutrality." Communications of the ACM 52.10 (2009): 14. Print.
Johnson, Katrina. "The importance of Net Neutrality to the digital economy." Telecommunications Journal of Australia 59.2 (2009): 19.1-19.16. Print.
Kabay, M. E.. "The net neutrality debate." Ubiquity 2006.May (2006): 1-1. Print.
Larribeau, Bob. "A fair approach to Net Neutrality." Telecommunications Journal of Australia 59.2 (2009): 21.1-21.5. Print.
Lenard, Thomas M., and Randolph J. May. Net neutrality or net neutering should broadband internet services be regulated. New York, NY: Springer, 2006. Print.
Nunziato, Dawn C.. Virtual freedom: net neutrality and free speech in the Internet age. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford Law Books, 2009. Print.
Raabe, Oliver. "Tagungsbericht â€“ Net Neutrality and Open Access." JuristenZeitung 66.9 (2011): 463-464. Print.