Net neutrality

The principle known as ‘Network Neutrality’ allows Internet users to access any web content or applications they choose, without restriction or limitation. This is taken for granted by the billions of people who access the Internet worldwide.

However a concerning precedent arose in the US a few years ago, and it will have global implications if it succeeds. The current net neutrality model allows all carriers and Internet content providers to have access to Internet infrastructure on an equal basis. This has created a free market – a level playing field for all Internet users, contributors and service providers from around the world.

The debate in the US centres on whether net neutrality will be protected by legislation – or if carriers will be able to charge for tiered network services. By design, IP is made up of layers that allow information to move from one computer to another. Opposes of net neutrality would like to regulate the use of these layers, and segregate the infrastructure so premium charges could be applied to use certain connections.

It is mainly the infrastructure providers – the large telecommunications and cable carriers who oppose net neutrality. It is to their benefit to be able to control web traffic, potentially charge users and make billions of dollars in the process. As an example, e-commerce companies could be charged a fee to obtain preferential routing of traffic to their site.

Because the global connectivity of the Internet is maintained through a complicated set of interconnection arrangements, any restrictions or limits applied in the United States, would affect the worldwide Internet community and economy.

Internet content providers are of course, strong advocates of net neutrality, because it is companies like these that would be charged high access fees for a superior level of service. Small businesses and web players, who could not afford these high fees, are lucky that they have these large companies providing such vocal support in favour of net neutrality. For content providers and business owners, affiliate marketing is also threatened, as it is based on referral traffic between website properties.

Exhibit
12
  – Implications of ending net neutrality

(Source: BuddeComm)

The tremendous growth of the Internet can be attributed to the open architecture that has allowed all individuals, businesses and associations around the world to contribute, communicate and conduct e-commerce transactions. It is essential that we maintain net neutrality.

In June 2011 the OECD highlighted that the strength and dynamism of the Internet depends on its ease of access to high speed networks, openness, and on user confidence. For this to happen, it agreed upon a number of basic principles for Internet policy; making this an important step in ensuring that the Internet remains open and dynamic.

They stressed that more ubiquitous access to and use of broadband Internet networks, which are available in a competitive market and at affordable prices, will help foster innovation and drive the growth of the Internet economy and of the economy in general. They also indicated that, in certain cases, public support and investment may be needed to ensure the greatest practical availability of these networks in our countries, in particular in rural and remote areas, and that such public intervention should support market competition and promote private investment initiatives.

They underlined the importance of generating demand and the significant role that governments can play in this regard by stimulating the use of broadband Internet networks in areas such as science, education, health, transportation and smart electricity grids as well as promoting the use of Internet for an ageing society.

Enhancing access and participation in the Internet Economy through the deployment of high speed broadband Internet networks can also help in increasing the availability of legitimate content, in addition to supporting the free flow of information and knowledge, the freedom of expression, association and assembly, the protection of individual liberties, as critical components of a democratic society and cultural diversity.

The policy-making principles that were agreed at the June 2011 meeting are designed to help preserve the fundamental openness of the Internet while concomitantly meeting certain public policy objectives, such as the protection of privacy, security, children online, and intellectual property, as well as the reinforcement of trust in the Internet.

Recognising the reliance of our economies on the Internet, the global nature of the Internet, and the various approaches implemented to stimulate the Internet economy, including innovative governance strategies in convening diverse groups of stakeholders to forge consensus-based policies, they agreed as governments, private sector stakeholders and civil society to the following basic principles for Internet policy-making:

·         Promote and protect the global free flow of information.

·         Promote the open, distributed and interconnected nature of the Internet.

·         Promote investment and competition in high speed networks and services.

·         Promote and Enable the Cross-Border Delivery of Services.

·         Encourage multi-stakeholder co-operation in policy development processes.

·         Foster voluntarily developed codes of conduct.

·         Develop capacities to bring publicly available, reliable data into the policy-making process.

·         Ensure transparency, fair process, and accountability.

·         Strengthen consistency and effectiveness in privacy protection at a global level.

·         Maximise individual empowerment.

·         Promote Creativity and Innovation.

·         Limit Internet intermediary liability.

·         Encourage co-operation to promote Internet security.

·         Give appropriate priority to enforcement efforts.

The Civil Society Information Society Advisory Council to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (CSISAC) – while strongly supportive in particular of policies that support the open, interoperable Internet, and the multi-stakeholder policy development processes – declined to endorse the final communiqué as some of the policies could undermine online freedom of expression, freedom of information, the right to privacy, and innovation across the world.

In particularly they objected to the over-emphasis on intellectual property enforcement at the expense of fundamental freedoms, and its movement away from the longstanding principle in many OECD countries’ laws of granting “mere conduit” online service providers limitations on liability for the actions of their users.

Exhibit
13
  – Norway a leader in net neutrality

(Source: BuddeComm)