Rejecting Net Neutrality (Essay Sample)

Rejecting Net Neutrality
Name
Institution
Rejecting Net Neutrality
The principle of net neutrality requires that governments and internet service providers (ISPs) to exercise equality in treating all data available on the Internet. These parties (ISPs and governments) should not charge differentially or discriminate by content, site, user, application, or mode of communication (Krämer, Wiewiorra & Weinhardt, 2013). Nonetheless, there is a growing level of concern among opponents of net neutrality on the need to reject this principle en masse, across the world. So far, the key focus of the debate on net neutrality seems to be on its effect on broadband consumers.
Anti-regulation proponents contend that the market forces that have in the past dictated competition among ISPs should also be used to determine the regulation of Network Neutrality. These proponents further maintain that a legislation of Network Neutrality would have a diverse effect on competition and innovation in as far as the broadband access market is concerned (Liebelson, 2014). As a result, ISPs are likely to find it increasingly difficult to recoup their investment capital. Most of the potential ISPs would thus be less willing to invest in such a market characterized by massive reduction in the level of competitiveness. Such a development would also reduce the incentives available to leading ISPs to invest in advanced networks.
Critics of net neutrality further argue that in the absence of implementation of bandwidth priority, future innovations in the market are likely to be dealt a major blow. Opponents of net neutrality have also voiced their concerns over what they term as an unequal internet playing field. To these critics, enabling internet usage to be governed by market forces is likely to render these regulations more neutral (Farber & Katz, 2007). This is because corporations pursuing the benefits that normally accompany a tiered service scheme for example, are more likely to pay for such kind of service.
On the other hand, individuals and corporations in need of a lower tier service can only pay the amount that in their opinion is a true reflection of their usage. Those advocating for rejection of net neutrality further maintain that accepting net neutrality would give the government undue advantage to regulate ISPs by placing them under tight controls (Liebelson, 2014). Therefore, these ISPs would find it hard to charge more in exchange for improved services. The broadband build-out would be faced with a slowdown.
Another argument put forward by those opposed to net neutrality is that the Internet, being a constantly-evolving technological environment, seriously hinders the ability of the government to ensure that laws are up-to-date as a way of ensuring meaningful regulation (May, 2012). More importantly, critics of net neutrality are opposed to this principle because it is not compatible with internet freedom. Those who reject net neutrality are fearful that when we give the government the upper hand to determine if ISPs are discriminating among content providers or users it would pose an even greater threat to internet freedom. In this respect, it loses compatibility with the ...