The subject of this book – whether or not to extend traditional telecommunications regulation to high-speed, or broadband, access to the Internet – is perhaps the most important issue facing the Federal Communications Commission. The issue is contentious, with academics and influential economic interests on both sides. This volume offers updated papers originally presented at a June 2003 conference held by the Progress and Freedom Foundation. The authors are top researchers in telecommunications.

Since its popularization in the mid 1990s, the Internet has impacted nearly every aspect of our cultural and personal lives. Over the course of two decades, the Internet remained an unregulated medium whose characteristic openness allowed numerous applications, services, and websites to flourish. By 2005, Internet Service Providers began to explore alternative methods of network management that would permit them to discriminate the quality and speed of access to online content as they saw fit. In response, the Federal Communications Commission sought to enshrine "net neutrality" in regulatory policy as a means of preserving the Internet's open, nondiscriminatory characteristics. Although the FCC established a net neutrality policy in 2010, debate continues as to who ultimately should have authority to shape and maintain the Internet's structure. Regulating the Web brings together a diverse collection of scholars who examine the net neutrality policy and surrounding debates from a variety of perspectives. In doing so, the book contributes to the ongoing discourse about net neutrality in the hopes that we may continue to work toward preserving a truly open Internet structure in the United States.

As congressional policymakers continue to debate telecomm. reform, a major point of contention is the question of whether action is needed to ensure unfettered access to the Internet. The move to place restrictions on the owners of the networks that compose and provide access to the Internet, to ensure equal access and non-discriminatory treatment, is referred to as ¿net neutrality.¿A major focus in the debate is concern over whether it is necessary for policymakers to take steps to ensure access to the Internet for content, services, and applications providers, as well as consumers, what these steps should be. Contents of this report: Intro.; FCC Activity; Industry Initiatives; Network Mgmt.; The Policy Debate; Congress. Activity. A print on demand report.

This second edition of eCommerce Economics addresses the economic issues associated with using computer-mediated electronic networks, such as the Internet, as mechanisms for transferring ownership of or rights to use goods and services. After studying this book, students will recognize problems that arise in the electronic marketplace, such as how to gauge the competitive environment, what products to offer, how to market those products, and how to price those products. They also will understand the conceptual tools required to evaluate the proper scope of public policies relating to electronic commerce. Core topics covered in the book include the underpinning of electronic commerce and the application of basic economic principles, including the theories of perfect and imperfect competition, to the electronic marketplace. Building on this foundation, the book discusses virtual products, network industries, and business strategies and conduct. Additional key topics include Internet advertising, intellectual property rights in a digital environment, regulatory issues in electronic markets, public sector issues, online banking and finance, digital cash, international electronic trade, and the implications of e-commerce for aggregate economic activity.

As congressional policymakers continue to debate telecommunications reform, a major point of contention is the question of whether action is needed to ensure unfettered access to the Internet. The move to place restrictions on the owners of the networks that compose and provide access to the Internet, to ensure equal access and non-discriminatory treatment, is referred to as “net neutrality.” While there is no single accepted definition of “net neutrality,” most agree that any such definition should include the general principles that owners of the networks that compose and provide access to the Internet should not control how consumers lawfully use that network, and they should not be able to discriminate against content provider access to that network. A major focus in the debate is concern over whether it is necessary for policymakers to take steps to ensure access to the Internet for content, services, and applications providers, as well as consumers, and if so, what these steps should be. Some policymakers contend that more specific regulatory guidelines may be necessary to protect the marketplace from potential abuses which could threaten the net neutrality concept. Others contend that existing laws and policies are sufficient to deal with potential anti-competitive behavior and that additional regulations would have negative effects on the expansion and future development of the Internet. The December 21, 2010, adoption, and November 20, 2011, implementation, by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) of its Open Internet Order has focused attention on the issue. Although most concede that networks have always needed and will continue to need some management, the use of prioritization tools, such as deep packet inspection, as well as the initiation of metered/usage based billing practices have further fueled the debate. A consensus on the net neutrality issue has remained elusive and support for the FCC's Open Internet Order has been mixed. While some Members of Congress support the action, and in some cases would have supported an even stronger approach, others feel that the FCC has overstepped its authority and that the regulation of the Internet is not only unnecessary, but harmful. Internet regulation and the FCC's authority to implement such regulations has been a topic of legislation (H.R. 96, H.R. 166, S. 74, H.R. 2434, H.R. 1, H.R. 3630, H.J.Res. 37, and S.J.Res. 6 ) and hearings in the 112th Congress. The House, on April 8, 2011, passed (240-179) H.J.Res. 37, to state disapproval of and remove the force and effect of the FCC's Open Internet Order. However, an identical resolution of disapproval (S.J.Res. 6) failed to pass the Senate on November 10, 2011, by a 52-46 vote. Attempts to prohibit implementation through the appropriations process, by the withholding of FCC funds for such purposes, have also been unsuccessful. It is anticipated that the issue of Internet access will be of continued interest to policymakers. The net neutrality issue has also been narrowly addressed within the context of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA, P.L. 111-5). Provisions required the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), in consultation with the FCC, to establish “nondiscrimination and network interconnection obligations” as a requirement for grant participants in the Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP). These obligations were released, July 1, 2009, in conjunction with the issuance of a notice of funds availability soliciting applications. Recipients of these awards have been selected and continued congressional oversight is expected.

Scientific Essay from the year 2014 in the subject Computer Science - Internet, New Technologies, , language: English, abstract: Over the past ten years, the debate over "network neutrality" has remained one of the central debates in Internet policy. Governments all over the world have been investigating whether legislative or regulatory action is needed to limit the ability of providers of Internet access services to interfere with the applications, content and services on their networks. Net neutrality comprises two separate non-discrimination commitments. Backward-looking ‘net neutrality lite’ claims that Internet users should not be disadvantaged due to opaque and invidious practices by their current Internet Service Provider (ISP). Forward-looking ‘positive net neutrality’ is a principle whereby higher Quality of Service (QoS) for higher prices should be offered on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms to all-comers. Neither extreme in the debate is an optimum solution. There is too much at stake to expect government to supplant the market in providing higher-speed connections, or for the market to continue to deliver without basic policy and regulatory backstops to ensure continued openness. Permitting content discrimination on the Internet will permit much more granular knowledge of what an ISP’s customers are doing on the Internet. A co-regulatory regime will ensure oversight and remove the most obvious abuses by fixed and mobile ISPs. Beyond rules that forbid network providers from blocking applications, content and services, non-discrimination rules are a key component of any network neutrality regime. This analytical study provides background on the debate over network neutrality, including the implications for business models going forward that have been attempted and that are currently in play. This article explains for a global policy audience what the regulatory and governance problems and potential solutions are for the issue referred to as ‘network neutrality’, unpacking its ‘lite’ and ‘heavy’ elements. Eschewing technical, economic or legalistic explanations previously tackled elsewhere, it explains that increasing Internet Service Provider (ISP) control over content risks not just differentiated pricing and speed on the Internet. It explains that a co-regulatory regime may ensure regulatory oversight and remove obvious abuses by fixed and mobile ISPs, without preventing innovation, while guarding against government abuse of the censorship opportunities provided by new technologies.

In early 2018, the Federal Communications Commission issued a repeal of net neutrality rules, which mandated equal access to web content regardless of the provider, user, or platform. While many telecommunications companies expressed jubilation and pockets of the internet expressed outrage, many were left scratching their heads and wondering why net neutrality matters at all. this book answers that question, offering readers a collection of articles on the history and importance of net neutrality. Coverage includes the earliest debates over internet regulation, the enactment of a net neutrality policy under Obama, court decisions on its enforcement, and its 2018 repeal.

Essay from the year 2017 in the subject Communications - Multimedia, Internet, New Technologies, grade: 1.6, , language: English, abstract: The term net neutrality is elusive, partly because its meaning varies depending on the speaker and associated agenda. The general perception of the term is used to describe two distinct proposed regulation related to broadband Internet providers. One proposal suggests that regulators would and enforce some regulations that would determine acceptable network management practices, as well as unacceptable degradation of disfavored internet application and antecedent content. The other argument suggest that the regulators would ban an internet access provider from signing commercial agreements with some applications and content providers in order to provide sophisticated performance enhancement technology that is essential in the support of unusually performance-sensitive contents and applications, for example, the real-time streaming of videos. The two proposals are distinct but complement each other. Most net neutrality proponents advocate the anti-blocking rule as well as close regulation of business-to-business relations between networks and content providers. These proposals are likely to be the focus of telecommunication policy for some time to come. The proposals have got the attention of Congress, who already has some bills on the topic. The President has weighed in the debate with his demand that a strong form of regulation. The papers aim to examine the anti-trust implication on net neutrality regulations.

After a decade of discussion on how to guarantee an open, sustainable internet and often intense debate regarding the Federal Communications Commission's 2009 public hearing on the application of the principles of net neutrality, on 21st December 2010 the various elements that comprise the solution to this now famous controversy were passed. This solution has not satisfied many people, and nearly everyone agrees that it will not end the debate and nor will it resolve the underlying structural problems. This book examines the source, development and viewpoints on this issue based on contributions from leading experts from the academic and business worlds in the USA and Europe who have been involved in the debate. This is a highly important book for understanding the various points of view on the very current and controversial issue of web neutrality.