In the past few years, a fight has been raging in Canada and the U.S. about something called “net neutrality.”
Last week, the U.S.’s Federal Communications Commission (FCC) approved new rules that net neutrality advocates are hailing as a victory in that battle.
So just what is net neutrality and why should you care?
I’m so glad you asked, otherwise this would have been a really short column.
In a nutshell, net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers (ISPs) and governments should treat all data on the Internet equally, and not discriminate or charge differently by user or content. In simpler terms, it’s about keeping the Internet free from a two-tiered information superhighway that would allow some websites to buy their way into a fast lane.
Think of it this way: Have you ever flown somewhere and, while sitting in Economy Class wedged between a sweaty fat guy who opposes the use of deodorant and a nervous dude who smells like he smoked a pack before getting onboard, wished you could afford to sit way up in First Class?
Under the principles of net neutrality, there is no First Class. We are all treated the same, with no special section (or Internet speeds) for those willing to pay extra. So, basically, everyone is sitting with the fat and smelly guys… OK, maybe not the greatest analogy I’ve ever come up with, but you get the general idea.
In both countries, the only folks who are against net neutrality are the big telecommunications companies who argue that a two-tiered system would better promote innovation and investment, or translated into layman’s terms, “squeezing as much money out of everyone as inhumanly possible.”
Want an example?
The movie streaming service Netflix recently had to sign deals with Comcast and Verizon to get smoother delivery of its streaming service (read: faster speeds). During the negotiations, Comcast actually “throttled” or slowed down Netflix to its subscribers; people complained and Netflix caved in to Comcast’s demands.
That sounds a lot like extortion to me, but I guess I don’t understand business negotiations in today’s world.
However, last week’s FCC decision reclassified broadband Internet in the U.S. as a telecommunications service, rather than an “information service,” which is not as tightly regulated. Canada already treats Internet access as a telecommunications service. The new American rules also say broadband providers cannot block or speed up connections for a fee, or strike deals with content firms, known as paid prioritization, for smoother delivery of traffic to consumers.
Here in Canada, both the federal Liberals and NDP have come out strongly in favour of net neutrality, however the Harper government has remained pretty quiet on the subject.
But, we are lucky Canada’s “Internet traffic management practices”
that the CRTC adopted in 2009 prevents ISPs from engaging in traffic shaping that is “unjustly discriminatory” or “unduly preferential.” Plus, the Telecommuni-cations Act also prohibits them from giving “undue or unreasonable” preference or disadvantage to any one party. CRTC chairman Jean-Pierre Blais also said in January that he unequivocally endorsed net neutrality.
The new FCC rules, however, also has an effect on Canadians, as many of our favourite web sites and services originate in the U.S., so a two-tiered system would certainly have affected the content we watch. Also, a weakening of the Internet in the U.S. would certainly have had a ripple effect around the world and have opened the doors to two-tiered systems elsewhere… especially in Canada.
But we shouldn’t be doing a victory dance just yet.
The American telecommunications companies have said they will appeal the new FCC rules – both in court and through lobbying Congress. And if Americans elect a Republican president in their next election, the FCC rules could be thrown out the door.
So, while a small battle may have been won, ultimately the net neutrality war will likely wage on.
