After a decade of discussion on how to guarantee an open, sustainable internet and often intense debate regarding the Federal Communications Commission's 2009 public hearing on the application of the principles of net neutrality, on 21st December 2010 the various elements that comprise the solution to this now famous controversy were passed. This solution has not satisfied many people, and nearly everyone agrees that it will not end the debate and nor will it resolve the underlying structural problems. This book examines the source, development and viewpoints on this issue based on contributions from leading experts from the academic and business worlds in the USA and Europe who have been involved in the debate. This is a highly important book for understanding the various points of view on the very current and controversial issue of web neutrality.

Essay from the year 2017 in the subject Communications - Multimedia, Internet, New Technologies, grade: 1.6, , language: English, abstract: The term net neutrality is elusive, partly because its meaning varies depending on the speaker and associated agenda. The general perception of the term is used to describe two distinct proposed regulation related to broadband Internet providers. One proposal suggests that regulators would and enforce some regulations that would determine acceptable network management practices, as well as unacceptable degradation of disfavored internet application and antecedent content. The other argument suggest that the regulators would ban an internet access provider from signing commercial agreements with some applications and content providers in order to provide sophisticated performance enhancement technology that is essential in the support of unusually performance-sensitive contents and applications, for example, the real-time streaming of videos. The two proposals are distinct but complement each other. Most net neutrality proponents advocate the anti-blocking rule as well as close regulation of business-to-business relations between networks and content providers. These proposals are likely to be the focus of telecommunication policy for some time to come. The proposals have got the attention of Congress, who already has some bills on the topic. The President has weighed in the debate with his demand that a strong form of regulation. The papers aim to examine the anti-trust implication on net neutrality regulations.

Since its popularization in the mid 1990s, the Internet has impacted nearly every aspect of our cultural and personal lives. Over the course of two decades, the Internet remained an unregulated medium whose characteristic openness allowed numerous applications, services, and websites to flourish. By 2005, Internet Service Providers began to explore alternative methods of network management that would permit them to discriminate the quality and speed of access to online content as they saw fit. In response, the Federal Communications Commission sought to enshrine "net neutrality" in regulatory policy as a means of preserving the Internet's open, nondiscriminatory characteristics. Although the FCC established a net neutrality policy in 2010, debate continues as to who ultimately should have authority to shape and maintain the Internet's structure. Regulating the Web brings together a diverse collection of scholars who examine the net neutrality policy and surrounding debates from a variety of perspectives. In doing so, the book contributes to the ongoing discourse about net neutrality in the hopes that we may continue to work toward preserving a truly open Internet structure in the United States.

As congressional policymakers continue to debate telecommunications reform, a major discussion point revolves around what approach should be taken to ensure unfettered access to the internet. The move to place restrictions on the owners of the networks that compose and provide access to the internet, to ensure equal access and nondiscriminatory treatment, is referred to as "net neutrality." There is no single accepted definition of "net neutrality," but most agree that any such definition should include the general principles that owners of the networks that compose and provide access to the internet should not control how consumers lawfully use that network, and they should not be able to discriminate against content provider access to that network. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in its February 26, 2015, open meeting voted 3-2, along party lines, to adopt open internet rules and released these rules on March 12, 2015. One of the most controversial aspects of the rules was the decision to reclassify broadband internet access service as telecommunications service under Title II, thereby subjecting internet service providers to a more stringent regulatory framework. With limited exceptions, the rules went into effect June 12, 2015. Various parties challenged the legality of the FCC's 2015 Open Internet Order, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, in a June 14, 2016, ruling, voted (2-1) to uphold the legality of all aspects of the 2015 FCC Order. A petition for full U.S. Appeals Court review was denied and a subsequent petition for U.S. Supreme Court review was declined. The FCC on December 14, 2017, adopted (3-2) an Order that largely reverses the 2015 regulatory framework. The 2017 Order, among other things, reverses the 2015 classification of broadband internet access services as a telecommunications service under Title II of the Communications Act, shifts much of the oversight from the FCC to the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice, and provides for a less regulatory approach. This action has once again opened up the debate over what the appropriate framework is to ensure an open internet. Reaction to the 2017 Order has been mixed. Some see the 2015 FCC rules as regulatory overreach and welcome a more "light-touch" approach, which they feel will stimulate broadband investment, deployment, and innovation. Others support the 2015 regulations and feel that their reversal will result in a concentration of power to the detriment of content, services, and applications providers, as well as consumers, and refute the claim that these regulations have had a negative impact on broadband investment, expansion, or innovation. The 2017 Order was published in the Federal Register on February 22, 2018, and went into effect on June 11, 2018. Federal Register publication triggered timelines for both court challenges and Congressional Review Act (CRA) consideration. Petitions for review have been consolidated in the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit. CRA resolutions (S.J.Res. 52, H.J.Res. 129) to overturn the 2017 Order, were introduced in the 115th Congress. S.J.Res. 52 passed (52-47) the Senate, but H.J.Res. 129 was not considered in the House. The FCC's move to adopt the 2017 Order has reopened the debate over whether Congress should consider a measure to amend existing law to provide greater regulatory stability and guidance to the FCC regarding broadband access. Four bills (H.R. 4682, H.R. 6393, S. 2510, and S. 2853) to provide a regulatory framework to outline FCC authority over broadband internet access services were introduced, but not acted on, in the 115th Congress. Debate over what the appropriate regulatory framework should be for broadband access is expected to continue in the 116th Congress.

"This book summarizes the state of discussions regarding net neutrality in Europe. It comes at the time the European Commission intends to legislate to guarantee the right of all citizens to access the open internet. Net neutrality is not only about how to ensure the fundamental right to receive and impart online information. The rules on the protection of consumers, by fostering transparency, also contribute to Internet neutrality and openness. Similarly competition law prohibits anti-competitive discrimination, including in Internet communications. Net neutrality thus appears at the juncture of various areas of the law. The contributions of this book compare the merits of various forms of regulation and discuss the policy dimensions of the net neutrality debate."--Back cover.

Apparent ignorance of more than a century of economic history now threatens the competitive constitution of the Internet under the guise of "net neutrality." Net neutrality is a slogan that stands for the proposition that the Internet and physical means of access to it should be available to all on uniform, non-discriminatory terms. Proponents of net neutrality fear, first, that access to bottlenecks, such as the "last mile" to the home, will be monopolized and second, that the successful monopolist will seek to favor its own vertical services by excluding or disfavoring others. Net neutrality is their answer to these threats. But the architects of the concept of net neutrality have simply resurrected the traditional naïve "common carrier" solution to the threats they fear. By choosing new words to describe a solution discredited by experience, the architects and economic interests supporting net neutrality may mislead themselves and others into repeating a policy error much more likely to harm consumers than to promote competition and innovation. Net neutrality policies could only be implemented through detailed price regulation, an approach that has often failed, in the past, to improve consumer welfare relative to what might have been expected under an unregulated monopoly. Regulatory agencies often settle into a well-established pattern of subservience to politically influential economic interests. Consumers, would-be entrants and innovators are not likely to be among these influential groups. History thus counsels against adoption of most versions of net neutrality, at least in the absence of refractory monopoly power and strong evidence of anticompetitive behavior - extreme cases justifying dangerous, long shot remedies.

In early 2018, the Federal Communications Commission issued a repeal of net neutrality rules, which mandated equal access to web content regardless of the provider, user, or platform. While many telecommunications companies expressed jubilation and pockets of the internet expressed outrage, many were left scratching their heads and wondering why net neutrality matters at all. this book answers that question, offering readers a collection of articles on the history and importance of net neutrality. Coverage includes the earliest debates over internet regulation, the enactment of a net neutrality policy under Obama, court decisions on its enforcement, and its 2018 repeal.