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.” 1This 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 Osipova, Natalia, and Carrie Halperin. "How Net Neutrality Works." The New York Times. The New York Times,

15 May 2014. Web. 26 Sept. 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.

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


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 Wu, Tim. "NETWORK NEUTRALITY, BROADBAND DISCRIMINATION." J. ON TELECOMM. & HIGH

TECH. L 2 (2003): 141-76. Web. 1 Jan. 2014. 4 Knappenberger, Brian. "‘A Threat to Internet Freedom’." The New York Times. The New York Times, 9 July

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,


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 Knappenberger, Brian. "‘A Threat to Internet Freedom’." The New York Times. The New York Times, 9 July

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


Bloomberg, 14 Jan. 2014. Web. 24 Oct. 2014. 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


Bloomberg, 14 Jan. 2014. Web. 24 Oct. 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. 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

New York Times, 15 Nov. 2014. Web. 21 Nov. 2014. 3 Nocera, Joe. "Net Neutrality Rules." The New York Times. The New York Times, 14 Nov. 2014. Web. 21

Nov. 2014. 4 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,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 Nocera, Joe. "Net Neutrality Rules." The New York Times. The New York Times, 14 Nov. 2014. Web. 21


New York Times, 12 Nov. 2014. Web. 21 Nov. 2014. 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 Wyatt, Edward. "Pressure Mounts on F.C.C. Chief Over Net Neutrality Rules." The New York Times. The

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 Nocera, Joe. "Net Neutrality Rules." The New York Times. The New York Times, 14 Nov. 2014. Web. 21



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

Documents