The research questions that this essay should answer are;
a) What is net neutrality? Why has it become a problem what were the old rules? and what the new rules? How the recent legislation of net neutrality passed in the US affect Canada?
b) The theory used should be distributive justice?
c) Is internet a public or private good and why? and if so, how should the internet be regulated?
Solution
Introduction
Internet is understood as the wide network of computers, domestic and non-domestic, which are connected together. It is a network of networks, which amalgamate to develop a pool of information, from which an individual can retrieve information if he/she has the permission. In simple terms, internet is a tool, which individuals use, for personal or professional reasons, to retrieve information regarding a particular subject. In modern times, internet does not only provide and share information, but it is also integral to e-commerce, which size is swelling every year. Therefore, debate, pertaining to net-neutrality, becomes a sensitive issue, so we must be aware of (Pablo & Juan, 2015).
In this research, we will address the questions 1) what is Net-Neutrality. 2) Why has it become a problem? 3) What were the old rules? 4) How the recent legislation passed in the United States affect Canada? We will address these questions in the context of the theory of Distributive Justice. However, to address these questions, comprehensively and aptly, it is imperative to establish that whether internet is a public or private good.
Is internet a public or a private good?
In the contemporary societies, information is considered essential, and it is believed that information reservoirs and services must be fairly distributed among individuals. Individuals use the information to improve their lives and to generate revenue. Therefore, it has great importance and relevance. Certain groups believe that government should ensure that information is provided equally and fairly to all individuals because it has become an essential part of life. In addition, it allows businesses to improve their products and services, which directly affects both size and quality of the economy. However, some groups, which oppose net neutrality, assert that 1) net neutrality never existed and 2) to stop the establishment of the monopoly of Internet Service Providers (their number is reducing significantly), government should rely on promoting competition rather than introducing flawed concepts and policies such as net neutrality.
As the internet is considered a primary good, which means that individuals require this good for well-being, therefore, everyone must have access to it, pro-net neutrality group claims. Also, countries or states are supposed to provide primary goods, such as liberty and conditions to prosper, to all its citizens. Therefore, the decision regarding the regulation of the internet is controversial. However, fair distribution of information and providing of fair internet services are not considered rights in most of the countries. This is why the notions, related to the theory of distribution, can only be a part of the policy, which a government may alter that disagrees with it.
States are finding it difficult to decide whether they should provide these services as a right and in fair/just/un-regulated manner or not. It is because states are still struggling to settle the question regarding the nature of internet service as a good (public or private). Therefore, the debate, whether the internet is a public or private good, is raging for a long time (Krämer & Wiewiorra, 2015).
Net– Neutrality: As per most simple and prevalent understanding, net-neutrality is the concept that all the traffic, on the internet must be treated the same. As a principle, it means internet providers, such AT&T in the United States & CRTC in Canada, must not speed-up, slow-down, or block links to particular information/content. A user must be able to define his/her internet experience, and he/she must be able to visit any website he/she desires. The Federal Communication Commission (F.C.C.) developed and enforced rules, in 2015, regarding net-neutrality, to ensure that users have the freedom to access information and content in a manner they desire. These rules were devised and implemented during Obama administration period. Canadian policy and regulations have not changed evidently to affect net-neutrality. In fact, institutions, such CRTC, are positively sensitive regarding it (Guindon & Dennie, 2010). However, some groups, who are against net-neutrality, argue that service differentiation can benefit consumers and promote internet adoption (Yoo, 2017). These groups also assert that net-neutrality is a made-up term, which is extremely misleading. To endorse their argument that net-neutrality is the made-up term, they give an example of large tech corporations that are already benefiting from the fast lanes, which is affecting competitive environment. In fact, the term net-neutrality truly means that all must have an equal opportunity (not equal speed), which is in accordance with free-market concepts and principles (Mcmillan, 2014).
Net Neutrality Issue: Net-Neutrality has become an issue because Trump Administration intends to alter net-neutrality policy, which supposedly provides influence-free internet to users. Trump Administration has introduced a bill, in the Congress, which demands changes to net-neutrality policy. The policy/rule permits, imperceptibly, broadband providers to shape or influence users’ online experience. Such policy and action are supported by the Federal Communication Commission (FCC), which devised and implemented net-neutrality policy, in the year 2015. Individual states are resisting this policy and action, and political parties are gearing up for a long battle in the Senate and Congress, of the United States. In Canada, in contrast, Net Neutrality became an issue because of the certain policies and actions of Internet Service Providers. It is not a state or government-created an issue, as it is in the United States (Guindon & Dennie, 2010).
A net-neutrality debate developed into a controversy, as it is a very misunderstood concept and a misleading term. For instance, people believe that alterations in net-neutrality will affect the ability of devices to access certain information. However, this is partially true as net-neutrality is a de-regulation of the internet market. Already large corporations are exploiting the contradictions of internet market to benefit for instance, large corporations use fast lanes.
Old Rules: The policy and rules, which are implemented by the FCC in the year 2015, were to provide (supposedly) an internet service, to American internet-users, which was free of any interference; companies, which provide broadband services, should not affect internet-experience of a user by regulating the flow of internet traffic. A user should not have quick and full access to certain websites, but not to the others, as such policy hurts socio-economic system (Barratt & Shade, 2007). We must also recognize that internet-neutrality existed even before the policy was introduced and implemented in the year 2015. However, because of apprehension, of companies like Google and Netflix regarding the growing power of Internet-Service-Providers, the policy was devised at the national level and implemented in the United States. This presumption that all users have identical access to information, because of the net-neutrality rule, is flawed. However, it is true that net-neutrality policy, of 2015 assured that Internet Service Providers would not exploit their capacity to affect internet-services (Bandler, 2017).
New Rules: FCC has repealed its 2015 policy and rules, of Net Neutrality, and introduced a new set of rules, which allow Internet Service Providers to regulate traffic. It makes users apprehensive as they fear that ISPs may manipulate online-traffic for financial reasons (Moore, 1997). This new policy, rules, and regulations, regarding net-neutrality, not only shape the online experience of internet users, but also it can be used as a utensil to promote certain businesses and information. However, the fact is that Big Clients are already paying large sums for preferred internet speed, which is also manipulation of a particular type.
How Net-Neutrality Rules Affect Canada?
Canada is different from the United States in some fundamental respects. For instance, the size, of government, in Canada, is large. It is proactive and interferes in the economic system, as it considers the capitalist system to be inherently flawed. In contrast, the United States firmly believe in the small size of government and less interference in economy by government (Republicans in Particular).
According to some analysts, United States new policy will have a direct and indirect impact on Canada, which is why it is being projected that Canadian government may take measure(s) regarding net-neutrality in Canada.
Currently, in Canada, Internet Service Providers are providing fair internet services, and they are not regulating the internet traffic or trying to influence the user’s experience. However, this may change suddenly and dramatically, once the new net-neutrality policy becomes a precedence. It is because United States economic and political decisions/developments subtly affect Canadian political & economic systems, which is why some sections of society and certain segments of the political system are apprehensive, as they believe that such drastic, controversial, and extreme changes in the United States could induce similar changes in Canada. Also, there is strong support for the notion that people must have greater access to the means of communication (Hackett & Anderson, 2011). The projection is that because of the controversial nature of the subject, Canadian government may get excited and tempted to address it, which means devising of policies and rules, regarding net-neutrality, and implementing them.
From the systematic scrutiny of evidence, regarding the subject, it is not difficult to conjecture that current government may take a measure, regarding net-neutrality, as it will affect Canadians and Canada’s e-commerce, both directly and indirectly. However, the chances of any decision and introduction of a policy pertaining to net-neutrality in short run are very slim.
How Canadians and Candian Businesses Will Be Affected
The decision, by the Trump Administration (implemented through the FCC), will still affect Canadian internet users, as Canadian internet users visit American websites frequently. Therefore, Canadian users will also suffer the ramifications of this new policy, adopted by the United States. Some analysts argue that Canadian users prefer digital content produced in Canada, by their preferences and culture into consideration (Howard, Busch, & Sheets, 2010). In addition to the internet users, from Canada, business companies too will be affected, as they will have to negotiate with American Internet Service Providers to ensure that their content and services are available in the United States. It means that financially sound companies will be able to make their content available to a large audience and this large audience will have quick and full access to the content. Therefore, the United States new net-neutrality policy will affect, directly and indirectly, users, businesses, and political system.
The Nature of the Net-Neutrality Decision (Distributive Theory of Justice)
The nature of the decision is very controversial, as it undermines justice and the concept of the competitive market. From the available evidence, we learn that numbers, of Internet Service Providers, are shrinking. There are now a handful of Internet Service Providers, which will have more power after the full introduction of the net-neutrality policy. Therefore, the new policy, regarding net-neutrality, will yield a flawed market that will have consequences of various types.
Conclusion
In this research, we addressed multiple questions, which were regarding the 1) Net Neutrality, 2) the controversy related to it, 3) repealed rules about net-neutrality; 4) new rules related to net-neutrality, 4) how net-neutrality affects Canada.
Net-neutrality, which is the unregulated flow of online traffic, has become a controversial subject since FCC decided to repeal it. The net-neutrality policy was introduced in 2015 to address the apprehensions of tech companies, such as Google and Netflix. The aim was never to ensure that the ISPs provide identical services to all its users, but rather to make sure that ISPs do not abuse their capacity and position. However, Trump Administration changed this policy, which imperceptibly permits ISPs to regulate online traffic, for any reason, if they desire.
The study also reveals that controversy springs-out of debate and perplexity regarding the nature of internet service as a good. If governments consider it a public good, then net-neutrality will not remain an issue as internet service providers will be bound to provide similar internet services to all. Also, they will not be able to regulate online traffic, clandestinely or blatantly.
Net-neutrality affects Canada both directly and indirectly. It directly affects its non-business users, who visit American websites for various reasons. Canadian business websites are also affected, directly, as they will have to negotiate with American Internet Service Providers so that their content is available in the United States.
We suggest that internet service should be considered a public good and it must not be regulated. In fact, each should have fair access to internet services, if not equal.
References
Bandler, A. (2017, July 14). 7 Reasons Net Neutrality Is Idiotic. Retrieved from https://www.dailywire.com/news/18613/7-reasons-net-neutrality-idiotic-aaron-bandler#
Barratt, N., & Shade, L. R. (2007). Net Neutrality: Telecom Policy and the Public. Canadian Journal of Communication, 32(2), 295-305.
Guindon, A., & Dennie, D. (2010). Net Neutrality in Canada and what it means for libraries. Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, 5(1), 1-38.
Hackett, R. A., & Anderson, S. (2011). Democratizing Communication Policy in Canada: A Social Movement Perspective. Canadian Journal of Communication, 36(1), 161-168.
Howard, P. N., Busch, L., & Sheets, P. (2010). Comparing Digitai Divides: Internet Access and Social Inequality in Canada and the United States. Journal of Communication, 35(1), 109-128.
Krämer, J., & Wiewiorra, L. (2015). When ‘Just ’is just not enough:Why Consumers Do Not Appreciate Non-Neutral Internet Access Services. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 57(5), 325-338.
Mcmillan, R. (2014, June 23). What Everyone Gets Wrong In The Debate Over Net Neutrality. Retrieved from https://www.wired.com/2014/06/net-neutrality-missing/
Moore, D. W. (1997). Regulation of the internet and internet telephony through the imposition of access charges. Texas Law Review, 76(1), 183-214.
Pablo, B., & Juan, J. (2015). Net Neutrality: Reflections on the Current Debate. The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1-20.
Yoo, C. S. (2017). Avoiding the Pitfalls of Net Uniformity: Zero Rating and Nondiscrimination. Review of Industrial Organization, 50(1), 509-536.
+447462439809