Ever heard of “net neutrality”? No?
Then how about “Internet democracy”? Tip: Whenever the word “democracy” is mentioned in reference to business, run away fast. It’s almost guaranteed that it’s going to be more about central planning than freedom.
So what is network neutrality?
Supporters want to require companies that deliver the Web into homes and businesses—usually cable TV and telephone companies—to treat all of the data flowing troughs those connection (known as “content”) the same.
That means a teenager’s IM (instant messaging), an emergency phone call or a televised presidential address. Every single item gets the same service regardless of importance, relevance, size or financial clout.
While such a “democracy” might sound attractive, it’s the sort of regulation that will stifle Internet innovation.
Some of the network operators that pipe the Internet into homes and businesses are considering charging willing content providers higher fees for improved services, such as faster and/or more reliable service and high-definition streaming video of their content. Under a net neutrality law, they couldn’t do that.
Supporters of net neutrality, Internet giants Google and Yahoo among them, say they fear that unless they get a neutrality law, a two-tiered Internet will emerge—where the biggest and richest providers get the best treatment, while the others are left with slow and inferior connections. And the more populist proponents worry that if Internet network operators can charge content providers more, then the costs will eventually be passed on to consumers.
But while Congress is debating these changes today, the Internet leaps ahead with tomorrow’s innovations.
"Technology moves faster than legislation," IPI’s Bartlett Cleland told TheDallas Morning News. "It seems the only thing they could do is something damaging.” And that damage will likely slow the development of the Web, which has been a key player in our growing economic strength.
The network operators need to be free to manage their businesses without government interference. That means favoring some content providers over others if that generates the money they need to continue innovating. The net has never been neutral, it only appeared that way because there wasn’t that much information flowing through the system. Forcing net neutrality will only choke the natural progression of this developing technology.