<!– @page { size: 8.5in 11in; margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } –> <!– @page { size: 8.5in 11in; margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } –>
Net Neutrality Proposal Revived in Senate
A few senators think that given everyone High-Speed-Internet access without paying extra fees would ensure the fate of internet users. Sure it does! However Internet service provider (ISP) such as AT&T, verizon don’t want to lose this benefit. These ISP company think that they have the right to charge extra for premium placement on their network to recoup vast investments in their infrastructure.
If the Net Neutrality Proposal were to passed then Verizon, AT&T or any internet service provider would have to do extra work to service their users and it’s free. For instance, Verizon would choose to set aside a dedicated pipe for all user-generated video content and it’s free. In other word, this Net’s proposal is asking these ISP to do charity work.
This Net’s proposal bill which is called Internet Freedom Preservation Act, would prohibit network operator from charging extra fee whether you’re a business or home-users. What that means is business has faster internet access compare to home-user, but still paying for the same fees.
The democrats wanted to dip their hands into the way telecommunication do their business. They wanted to shape it in a way so that it would benefit the user greatly. However these so called Internet Freedoom Preservation Act was defeated by the Republican a year ago. However this year the majority tipped slightly over to the democratic side.
It doesn’t seem that Internet service provider (ISP), and telephone industry don’t want to hand their benefits away without a fight. The House of Representatives, Rep. Edward Markey is expected to reintroduce the Net and hoping to win. However since it was defeated, he now needs 60 vote in senate for the filibuster.
Each sides has their own believe system. ISP and telephone industry think it’s bad for them because it would prevent them from customizing their internet service, and that would mean all the telephone industry, including AT&T and Verizon, will be losing advances in home monitoring, greater security of their financial transaction, new entertainment choices and telecommuting opportunities.
The bill will takes away a huge advantage of these Internet Service Provider (ISP) and prevent them from maximizing their service potential.
On the other hand, however, users see things from a different perspective. Ranging from actress Alyssa Milano to Vint Cerf, one of the Net’s pioneer, would think that any prioritization is threaten the freedoms that internet users have always enjoyed. Technically these two sides have different philosophy. Internet service providers want to profit as much as they can, whereas senator Snowe-Dorgan or the Net’s pioneer would think it should be FREE. They did mounted a grassroots campaigns calling for federal regulations barring such a practice.
What exactly these senates and Net’s pioneers want to do is and I quote, “mark another step toward in the hands of its users and not the hands of a few gatekeepers”. Gatekeepers is refer to the Internet Service Provider, or telephone company that open the gates so we, the users, can access to the internet.
The bill was co-sponsored by six Democrats: Senator Barara Boxer, John Kerry, Tom Kerry, Tom Harkin, Patrick Leahy, Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama, and no Republican except Snowe. April 5, 2006 it was defeated by Republican. However that doesn’t stop democrats from giving it another shot.
Outside Net Neutrality proposes that all broadband companies must offer customers the option of purchasing standalone service. What it does is it’ll merge AT&T and BellSouth together. But AT&T resist the idea and that they have no intention of applying Net Neutrality conditions more broadly.
It is still not sure which side is going to win. History could normally repeats itself once again. Formal Chairman of a House Internet and telecommunications subcommittee said it was not immediately clear when the action would occur. There might be a chance that Democrats would give up at some point.
By all means, the chance of resurrecting this bill is slim because there’s no benefit for the telephone industry, and would reduce their profit greatly. Hence, they’ll put up the fight to the end.
