Brief the policy and tell what are the problems and gives few solutions for Net Neutrality Policy?
Internet is a vital part of our lives where we believe to retrieve lawful content. But there are certain people who charge differently or do not open a site at the same speed. There is great need for the government to interfere so that there can be open network and net neutrality can sustain. Corporates have used net neutrality for increasing their own profits and decrease their level of competition. They practice it by playing with the neutrality concept where they change the price we pay for using internet and they also affect the quality of connection. This also leads to endanger the privacy of consumers (American Civil Liberties Union, 2015).
In today’s world it has become very easy for anyone to publish anything on the media and sell it for a price or just free without any gatekeepers. Many big companies like Yahoo, Google, AOL and Tiscali are good players and hence in such an open system where there are Four Freedoms of Broadband there is need to maintain and regulate network neutrality (Castells W.& Annenberg W., 2005).
President Obama recently advised the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to levy common carrier regulation on the Internet access industry. This would mean that FCC shall be an independent regulatory agency which can control the prices and terms of service presented by telecommunication “carriers”. The people in favor of FCC regulation states that this regulation will help in not letting large Internet access suppliers such as Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T to consume market control to benefit some content suppliers particularly where they take a title interest. The favored content suppliers will get preferential allocations of bandwidth and also preferred price policy shall be adopted by them. This shall act as a barrier for the new entrants in the industry (Owen B., 2015).
Internet is generally perceived a place where free communication takes place without any fear on security and privacy. Today internet has posed a challenge to the governance where there can be some authority to control the internet usage at a global level. The reason behind this is that it is difficult to control technology and as it has global reach it creates jurisdictional fights between different government regulators (The Information Society, 2002).
The solution to it has being reached by applying various strategies. One of them is the formation of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). ICANN is a private, non-profit entity whose authorized directive is to do technical coordination of core Internet resources, most particularly domain names (e.g., mycomputer.org).Its site of formation resides in California but its power ranges over all users of the Internet (The Information Society, 2002).
There is need for the new adopters to be part of the system to contribute and improve technology. There needs to be application of a strategy where bad aspects of generative internet goes away keeping innovation open in it (Zittrain J., 2008).
One of the solution to net-neutrality is to have legal intervention in the system so that the peole who are liable for wrongdoing are held and punished. For this it is not necessary that only some legal suit or infringement shall be applied at all times but at certain times community process can also be used in a legal manner to tell the society of the way the source hampers the internet network.
Maintaining Data Portability
In this world of tethered appliances and Web Services any service or product we use at one moment might act in a different manner after some time without our knowledge or agreement. If the security matters on generative platforms are lessened, it is possible that technology merchants can discover worth with both generative and non-generative business models.
Network Neutrality and Removal pf discriminatory behavior
There should be no discrimination between different service providers and the platform should be open for all the external content or service providers. The technical ways of using the network should not have any biasness.
Making the individual liable rather than blaming the technology
As the world is too big with so many users, activities it becomes difficult to regulate things. As both generative and non-generative devices uphold continuous interaction with many merchants and software providers, regulators might pursue to need those manufacturers to form the services they propose more exactly, causing a now-familiar failure to generativity. For this one way is to decrease the pressure on institutional and technological gatekeepers in order to safeguard that individual offenders can be held unswervingly accountable.
From Network Neutrality to API Neutrality
The absence of fabrication of neutrality to initiate with for tethered appliances and the services accessible through them. Sensible people differ on the worth of describing and directing network neutrality. If there is a current universal danger to neutrality in the drive of bits, it comes not from limitations on outdated Internet entrée that can be avoided using generative PCs, but from improvements to outdated and developing appliance wise services that are not open to third-party tampering.
Maintaining Privacy as Software Becomes Service
In today’s scenario, the usage of our PCs is limited for private data in areas which are in the hands of third parties. Therefore, there is need to maintain privacy in the software in order to take services from the public.
Balance between the generative and non-generative systems
Claims to intellectual property is made by many people and hence it becomes difficult to judge who original creator is. For the previous twenty years, the new background of data technology has put up opposing domains of software production. These domains can be assembled coarsely about two poles fighting for supremacy in the ground. On one sideway is the proprietary software, which delivers cash-and-carry function for the user. On the other sideway is free software, mentioning to the source code of the software which is vulnerable to public vision and alteration. It is not a relaxing process for the law to preserve neutrality in the clash between the two domains, impartially boosting growth in both models. There has to be struck a balance between the two (Zittrain J., 2008).
In 2014, U.S. government announced that ICANN- Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers shall continue its job of keeping in order the IP addresses by ensuring that one address is not issued more than once. ICANN also facilitates top level domains for example those which suffix- .com, .org, .uk, and more recently, .clothing. This move by U.S. is wise and shall help to control net neutrality ( Zittrain J., 2014).
American Civil Liberties Union, (2015), What is net neutrality? Protect your right to access what you want and how you want it on the Internet, Retrieved From https://www.aclu.org/feature/what-net-neutrality.
Owen B., (2015), Net Neutrality and Title II of the Communications Act , Retrieved From https://siepr.stanford.edu SIEPR policy brief.
Castells M. & Annenberg W., (2005), The Network Society From Knowledge to Policy , Center for Transatlantic Relations, Washington.
Zittrain J., (2014), No, Barack Obama Isn't Handing Control of the Internet Over to China- The misguided freak out over ICANN, Retrieved From https://www.newrepublic.com/article/117093/us-withdraws-icann-why-its-no-big-deal.
The Information Society, (2002), ICANN and Internet Governance: Leveraging Technical Coordination to Realize Global Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, Georgia, USA.
Zittrain J., (2008), The Future of the Internet And How to Stop It , Yale University Press, London.