Here's What You Need to Know About Net Neutrality and the Internet's Future

Image via Complex Original

The Internet you've come to know and love functions like this: Internet Service Providers (ISPs like Verizon, Time Warner, and Comcast) treat all lawful website data equally. That means they give the traffic going to and from a website, like MySpace, the same access to data as the traffic traveling to a site like Facebook, no matter how much the former has fallen out of relevancy. An ISP can't just open the Internet highway lanes for one website and slow them down for another just because they favor one—and Facebook can't make a deal to pay off Comcast so that their traffic has priority over MySpace's.

Likewise, Verizon can't block you from visiting a Sprint website just because its a competitor. You're free to go to either website, and hundreds of thousands of others, as long as you have access to the Internet. This is why Net Neutrality is referred to as "Open Internet." It's a level playing field for those who join.

The Internet hasn't ever been treated as a utility, like your landline phone, or electricity. And during the last few months, the FCC has made moves to reclassify the Internet as a utility to keep it functioning as it is today—you can't fuck with public utilities. ISPs and other corporations have fought this, and want more control over Internet traffic and how its distributed. They want to eliminate Net Neutrality. 

ISPs argue that they should be able to charge websites that take up a sizeable amount of bandwidth more than websites that don't take up as much. When you consider websites like Netflix can consume about 34 percent of the Internet's traffic during peak hours, that doesn't sound unreasonable. That's a big chunk! ISPs would rather have Netflix, a company that generates a ton of profit, pay for prioritized Internet lanes. In fact, Netflix already has paid Comcast and Verizon for faster lanes.

For individual users like you, who might play computer games and use Skype calling (which also takes up more data), ISPs could offer you a package that allots you more data for those services, so lag would be minimized. (Reddit user Quink made an example graphic in 2009 of what these packages could look like for individual users.)

Also, because of the money that could be made, ISPs say they could start upgrading to fiber optic networks (which Google has already built in a few cities around the country). According to many ISPs, not getting that extra money means upgrading to fiber in more parts of the country will take longer. Almost every ISP has opposed Net Neutrality, and has lobbied against it. Since the FCC began looking into ways to keep Net Neutrality afoot, ISPs have worried that the FCC would be too strict with regulations they were planning. ISPs wanted broadband to be classified as a "information service" (not a public utility) which would mean that they're not required to provide equal service to all users.

Advocates want to keep the practice of letting all legal Internet content be treated equally, without prioritization. There are a few reasons why.

Going back to talking about Facebook and MySpace: MySpace was huge when Facebook first opened up shop in 2004. If the ISPs' vision for the Internet was in place back then, MySpace could have paid (and afforded) to have a faster Internet lane and priority over Facebook, which Mark Zuckerberg wouldn't have been able to afford. But because the traffic was treated equally, one didn't have an advantage over the other, outside of what they offered on their websites. Advocates say that because the Internet has been equal in this way, it's allowed for companies to seemingly rise out of nowhere from dorm rooms and basements, and has spurred innovation—and competition. Of course, Netflix can afford to foot a bill for priority now, but what about the Netflix-competitor of the future, that might be being dreamed up in the minds of college students right now?

There is also worry that companies could slow down traffic to competing websites. If Comcast is your ISP, but you're thinking of flirting with Google, Comcast theoretically could make it harder for you by flat-out blocking access to a Google Fiber website, or at least slowing it down to the point where you give up. Or, Time Warner could slow down streaming video sites that compete against its cable television business. One of the main ways of securing Net Neutrality was by the FCC classifying broadband as a public utility (like a landline phone), and not an information service, which is what they voted on today.

The FCC, led by chairman Tom Wheeler, cast a 3-2 vote that reclassified broadband as a utility, which requires Internet content to be treated equally, and bars ISPs from paid prioritization. Their vote places broadband under a telecommunications service Title II regulation, and, as Wheeler says, makes sure "that no one—whether government or corporate—should control free open access to the Internet."

While certainly not the only one, a big player in getting things moving was President Barack Obama.

Last November, he laid out his support to keep the Internet free and open. “For almost a century, our law has recognized that companies who connect you to the world have special obligations not to exploit the monopoly they enjoy over access into and out of your home or business,” President Obama said in a video on the White House website. “It is common sense that the same philosophy should guide any service that is based on the transmission of information—whether a phone call or a packet of data.” This move is thought to have given FCC chairman Tom Wheeler the support he needed to get things done, months after an appeals court struck down the FCCs power to regulate the Internet.

Over the course of most of last year, more than 4 million Americans sent their support and opinions to the FCC on how to best achieve Net Neutrality. Mark Ruffalo, Eddie Vedder, Oliver Stone, Tom Morello, Fred Armisen, and more all signed a letter sent to FCC chairman Tom Wheeler expressing their support as well.

The FCC will publish their full regulations, and ISPs and companies will go through it with a fine comb. But, for the most part, nothing should really change. The FCC has said that they won't be implementing any new taxes, and won't regulate how much users pay to use the Internet. (Because, remember, while the Internet will be treated equally, not all ISP packages come with the same speeds). So, the cost of broadband can still go up, but nothing crazy should happen. 

But, as the ISPs said in their statements, expect a lot of moves in courts to sue the FCC to stop these regulations. So things aren't exactly settled, but are in a good position. It's expected that the regulations will go into effect in about three months.