Why is Net Neutrality Important

In her 4/11/10 Op-Ed piece in the New York Times, Susan Crawford outlines the reasoning behind net neutrality and the strategy for the FCC to achieve it. First of all why do we need it:

Until August 2005, the commission required that companies providing high-speed access to the Internet over telephone lines not discriminate among Web sites. This allowed innumerable online businesses — eBay, Google, Amazon, your local knitter — to start up without asking permission from phone and cable companies. There was nothing unusual about this legal requirement; for more than 100 years, federal regulators had treated telegraph and telephone service providers as "common carriers," obligated to serve everyone equally.

Under the Bush administration the F.C.C. deregulated high-speed Internet providers. The F.C.C. declared that high-speed Internet access would no longer be considered a “telecommunications service” but rather an “information service.” This removed all high-speed Internet access services — phone as well as cable — from regulation under the common-carrier section of the Communications Act.

When the Bush F.C.C. deregulated ISPs it hoped that it would prompt greater competition in Internet access services. The unintended consequences were that a wave of mergers kept prices high and speeds slow. And eventually the carriers started saying that they wanted to be gatekeepers — creating fast lanes for some Web sites and applications and slow lanes for others.

How to solve this? Crawford's solution:

In its decision last week, the appeals court said that the “information services” label given to high-speed Internet access providers means the F.C.C. cannot prohibit companies like Comcast from engaging in discriminatory activities... The F.C.C. has the legal authority to change the label, as long as it can provide a good reason. And that reason is obvious: Americans buy an Internet access service based on its speed and price — and not on whether an e-mail address is included as part of a bundle. The commission should state its case, relabel high-speed Internet access as a “telecommunications service,” and take back the power to protect American consumers.

Now the Glen Becks out there will tell you that net neutrality inhibits free speech and is a plot to spy on your internet activity. He couldn't be further from the truth and as usual is deliberately misleading hi audience.

The full NYT Op-Ed is here