< Previous Page Return to Title Page Next Page >

The Hijacking of "Network Neutrality"

  • Original meaning: Refraining from anticompetitive practices with regard to Internet content and services (e.g., phone and cable companies interfering with competing products delivered via the Internet connections they provide)

  • Once this sensible notion gained traction, parties with vested interests sought to "hijack the bandwagon" by changing the definition -- ironically -- so as to bias things in favor of themselves! For example:

    • BitTorrent, Inc. and Vuze, Inc. - Want no mitigation of the network protocol from which they profit... even though this protocol actually makes networks non-neutral (by exploiting flaws in TCP/IP), seizes priority over time critical traffic, degrades performance, and inappropriately shifts costs from content providers to ISPs

    • Alcatel-Lucent has jumped in, defining neutrality as not throttling their VPN when it tries to monopolize networks (even if other protocols are throttled)

    • Free Press and "Orthodox End-to-Endians" - Ideological belief there should be no net management at all! Free Press FCC petition defines QoS measures for Internet telephony or tiered pricing (paying more for service that costs more to provide) as "discrimination" and asks that they be prohibited