{"id":2394,"date":"2017-11-28T08:37:01","date_gmt":"2017-11-28T08:37:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/tribelocal.com\/?p=2394"},"modified":"2018-01-09T18:49:03","modified_gmt":"2018-01-09T13:19:03","slug":"repealing-net-neutrality-affect-local-business","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/tribelocal.com\/repealing-net-neutrality-affect-local-business\/","title":{"rendered":"How Repealing Net Neutrality Will Affect Local Business ?"},"content":{"rendered":"
The internet is a fascinating place. It allows people to find products and services, get in touch with family and friends, watch videos, listen to songs, do their banking work, and play games. However, all these wonderful aspects of the internet may change after 14 December, after the Federal Communications Commission votes to repeal net neutrality. <\/span><\/p>\n Net neutrality is a contentious topic in the US. Those for net neutrality state that changing the status quo would adversely affect small and local businesses and consumers while those against net neutrality believe that the existing laws are too restrictive and need to change to give more freedom to the content that is available in the World Wide Web. <\/span><\/p>\n Before delving into how repealing net neutrality would affect local business, it is necessary to understand the premise of net neutrality.<\/span><><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Net neutrality refers to the principle that all internet traffic is treated and considered equal. There is no distinction between who posts the content and why, and all types of content are meted the same treatment. It is this equality that allows any and everyone access to the information they require and it has resulted in creating a dynamic online world that people know today as the internet<\/span><\/p>\n However, this is set to change. Come December 14, 2017, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) under the aegis of the chairman, Ajit Pai, will be voting to repeal the Obama administration\u2019s <\/span>Open Internet Order<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/span>, which was put into place in 2015. <\/span><\/p>\n The Open Internet Order prevents broadband providers from charging more for internet <\/span>fast lanes to access certain content and blocking or slowing down certain content<\/span><\/a><\/span>. Those who are against the repeal claim that by getting rid of the existing law, internet service providers will have complete control over the internet and they will get to decide which content is the winner and which the loser. In other words, certain content will get preferential treatment while other content will get step-motherly treatment.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n The current rules <\/span>put internet service providers (ISPs) under a utility-like law<\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span> in accordance to Title II of the Communications Act of 1934.<\/span><\/p>\n In 2015, the then commissioner of the FCC, <\/span>Thomas Wheeler<\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span>, too was against enforcing complete net neutrality. A leaked document in 2014 revealed that Mr. Wheeler was planning to make it easier for ISPs to receive payment from companies to provide their content on fast lanes so that internet users could find it more quickly. However, that was not to be. Rumors suggest that President Barack Obama was instrumental in changing Mr. Wheeler\u2019s mind. The end result was 2015 Open Internet Order under Title II, 1934 Communications Act. <\/span><\/p>\n The <\/span>regulation enforces many different rules<\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span>, including the following:<\/span><\/p>\n ISPs have to disclose hidden fees and data caps<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n ISPs are prevented from exempting their own video service from the data caps that they enforce on mobile internet users while charging video service of their competitors and restricting the service to a data cap<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n Stopping the ISPs from slowing download speed of competitors\u2019 apps and websites<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n Preventing ISPs from forging contracts with large content companies that allow traffic to flow to content of these companies (preferential treatment)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n Allowing ISP competitors and customers to lodge complaints about their internet service provider\u2019s conduct if they believe it is unfair and unjust<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n <\/span><\/p>\n Net neutrality has received support from tech giants like Google and consumer groups. However, the existing regulation has been severely criticized by Mr. Pai, the current FCC Chairman, and internet service providers. <\/span><\/p>\n Mr. Pai opined that the FCC cannot be responsible for business models of ISPs nor will the Commission be looking to prohibit services, applications, and products that could spur competition. He is of the opinion that the FCC should be used to establish rules that allow companies to compete; and consumers should be the ones to decide the winner and loser and not the administration, as was the case with the Obama administration. <\/span><\/p>\n It is anticipated that before the 14 December vote, there is bound to be a battle with those who are against repealing of the existing regulations. Already, about 21m comments have been submitted to the FCC, and free speech activists are in touch with legislators trying to convince them not to accept the plans of the FCC. Whether this will yield any result it not certain, but those in favor of net neutrality are going guns blazing and trying to stop the FCC from handing over the internet to ISPs in a silver platter. <\/span><\/p>\n Nancy Pelosi, who is a Democratic leader, has called the FCC decision to repeal the Open Internet Order an assault on innovation, entrepreneurship, and competition which need internet to sustain. <\/span><\/p>\n Many voices of dissent have risen, and they have become more active, especially since there are suggestions that Russia may have interfered in US presidential elections with the help of fake news. Of course, that is a different story altogether, but it is intertwined with net neutrality and how paid content can sway opinions and democratic process. Many feel that Mr. Pai, who comes from telecom background, is giving internet providers what they want \u2013 full and total control of the internet to boost their bottom line. <\/span><\/p>\n As is expected on 14 December, the FCC will vote against the existing regulation. This will be a victory for cable and broadband operators. These operators, along with Mr. Pai (who incidentally is the former lawyer for Verizon) have stated that there is no need for regulation, which is an expensive burden on the operators and impedes innovation and investment. <\/span><\/p>\n Mr. Pai has said on record that the existing regulation is based on hypothetical harm and frenzied prophecy that sans regulation, it will result is doom and chaos.<\/span><\/p>\n Those for and against net neutrality are fighting a bitter battle. The tech world is completely divided, with cable operators making the final push to take control of online content. Recently, the Justice Department started legal proceedings to prevent AT&T from taking over Time Warner. If the telecom giant takes over Time Warner, it will also gain control over CNN, Warner Bros, and HBO. <\/span><\/p>\n The Justice Department justified by stating that AT&T already owns DirecTV satellite business and distributes and creates content. Should AT&T end up owning the assets of Time Warner, it will be able to withhold programming from its competition and can force them to payer higher prices for content distribution. <\/span><\/p>\n Tech companies like Reddit, Amazon, Etsy, Wikipedia, and Google have joined forces to protect net neutrality. These companies have said that neutrality has given every company the same chance, be it big or small, and as a result, net neutrality has spurred innovation.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n Free speech activists are concerned that eliminating net neutrality would result in online censorship. These activists have planned a number of protests on 7 December 2017, which is a week prior to the vote by FCC. These protests will take place across the US at Verizon stores. <\/span><\/p>\n Evan Greer, Campaign Director, Fight for the Future, believes that the modern generation is angry about measures to do away with net neutrality. It will take away free speech and that is why internet users are joining the fight and protests. <\/span><\/p>\n Mr. Greer believes that by having protests across the nation, legislators would have to answer their constituents as bureaucrats cannot just pass the anti-neutrality laws with answering the Congress. <\/span><\/p>\n In fact, on 18 May 2017, the FCC took an initial vote which they claim would restore the freedom of the internet from the archaic Title II regulation. After the vote, the FCC did not plan to enforce any changes in Title II. Instead, it called upon the public and companies to give their views and opinion. This led to the floodgates being opened and many free speech organizations and activists, tech companies, and ordinary citizens bombarded FCC and lawmakers with their views. <\/span><\/p>\n They all said one thing \u2013 net neutrality is important and should not be touched. However, the FCC believes that <\/span>Title II has made internet providers complacent<\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span>. They are not investing enough money to upgrade their infrastructure and this could have an adverse effect not just on the internet, but the nation as a whole.<\/span><\/p>\n In 2016, the Open Internet Order won an unlikely legal battle when a federal appeals court upheld the legality of the regulations. <\/span><\/p>\n After the Obama administration brought in the regulation in 2015, internet service providers decided to challenge it in the court of law. The ISPs stated that while they were not against the rules, they did not appreciate that the FCC had overseen the way the internet works in the country. The ISPs said that the regulations that have put the FCC in control would hinder innovation and prevent investment in the industry. <\/span><\/p>\n However, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals went ahead and ruled in favor of the FCC while noting that the Commission did not have the authority to categorized broadband and internet under the Title II of the Telecommunications Act. <\/span><\/p>\n In the same court case, internet service providers wanted to be protected from anti-blocking laws. However, the court went on to rule that the Open Internet Order would be applicable to both wireless and fixed-line internet. <\/span><\/p>\n Legal experts explained that the ruling by the federal appeals court meant that the regulation pertaining to net neutrality would stay in place as the court had upheld the rules, but the federal government, through the FCC, would have to supervise the way internet providers manage the traffic that comes onto their networks. Hence, the FCC was mandated to review any complaint filed by competition and\/or consumers. <\/span><\/p>\n When appeals court verdict came out, Mr. Wheeler had said that the internet would stay a platform that encourages innovation, economic growth, and free expression. He also stated that the Commission would enforce rules for fixed and mobile networks to ensure the internet stays free and open.<\/span><\/p>\n This ruling meant that phone and cable companies had to treat all traffic equally \u2013 no blocking competitor\u2019s sites and content and no fast lanes for companies with deep pockets. It was a ruling that was celebrated by activists and tech companies that supported the regulations. However, the celebrations may come to an abrupt end on 14 December 2017 when the Federal Communications Commission votes to overturn the Open Internet Order.<\/span><\/p>\nWhat is Net Neutrality?<\/span><\/span><\/h2>\n
What Does the 2015 Open Internet Order Enforce?<\/span><\/span><\/h2>\n
\n
Repealing Net Neutrality<\/span><\/span><\/h2>\n
Divided Tech Categories- TribeLocal<\/span><\/span><\/h2>\n
Fight for Net Neutrality<\/span><\/span><\/h2>\n
Legal Battle for Net Neutrality<\/span><\/span><\/h2>\n
ISPs Take on Net Neutrality<\/span><\/span><\/h2>\n