The era of net neutrality has now touched its end in United States. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC), under Republican control, has approved by three votes against two withdrawal of measures established in 2015 with Barack Obama to shield equity on Internet. In front of a network understood as "public good", where service providers are obliged to treat all data equally regardless of ir origin, type and destination, a system will be imposed that allows different speeds according to payment and interests of Operators. A triumph of liberalism, a defeat of great technology and, at very least, an unknown to consumer.
The change, presented as "a victory of freedom," has come from hand of great suppliers. Telecom giants such as Comcast, AT T or Verizon have allied with administration of Donald Trump to break legal dike that precisely prevented those companies landed imposing ir dictates on traffic and content of network. Under system approved in era of Barack Obama, operator should always offer same deal. You were prevented from blocking access to Web pages, slowing connection or accelerating it under payment. The criterion was fairness. Avoid discrimination. To safeguard neutrality of nervous system of world knowledge. All this has come down today.
The consequences of this deregulation can be profound. "Neutrality in network guaranteed Darwinian competitiveness among all possible uses of Internet in a way that Sobreviviesen best," wrote Tim Wu, professor at Columbia University who coined concept. Demolished this armor, anor evolutionary stage begins. The operator, who so far could not interfere with traffic on his highway, can now create fast, slow lanes or directly deny entry.Who controls Web
And now, who protects user? The question is crucial. The two Democratic commissioners of Federal Committee on Communications stressed danger of leaving Internet without regulation. "The consumer has no one to defend him, he is exposed to big suppliers," said Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel.
The Republicans argue that control of operators and persecution of unfair or prejudicial practices will fall into Federal Trade Commission. But this federal agency, as Democrats recalled, lacks experience in se tasks and also does not count personally for it. On or hand, Federal Communications Commission, which has been protecting users for two years, is relegated to transparency issues. "Why do we end protections? Why do we allow discrimination to be made? This is an abdication of responsibilities in favor of suppliers, " Democrats sentenced.
Although suppliers have not made public ir plans, door is opened to negotiate agreements with portals, to offer internet services packages similar to those of cable televisions, and that, in end, give more speed to ir partners in Detriment of those who do not. And even, according to experts, to block those who compete with ir offerings.
The kaleidoscope of scenarios is almost inexhaustible, but it is summarized in possibility of scales of service and, refore, different prices for user and also for big companies. This last point is particularly delicate. An older complaint from operators is expense generated by larger portals, whose massive use of data monopolizes bandwidth. This can give rise to special rates, something possibly assumable by Google, Amazon or Facebook, but onerous for new companies or those in precarious financial situations.
The President of Commission, Ajit Pai, main enemy of neutrality in network, has repeatedly denied that changes will increase costs to user or allow blockades. Among its arguments are that none of this occurred before 2015 and, on contrary, reform has reduced investment in broadband to point that, to continue this fall, not only jeopardized speed in network but consumer was going to face a increase Prices.
"The withdrawal of neutrality will restore freedom, return to a better and cheaper Internet. There will still be protection for consumer and ir access will not be limited. But it is not our job to decide who wins and who loses in Internet economy. The government will stop regulating how providers should handle mselves, and y'll have incentives to cope with next generation of networks and services, "Pai said.
Once initiative is approved, re are only two ways to prevent application. The courts or a law. None seems easy to achieve in short term. But opposition front does not cease to be broad and powerful. The Democrats, like big internet companies, from Google to Facebook, consider that deregulation attacks central nerve of network.
"The measure puts Commission on wrong side of history, law and Internet. But this does not end here, future does not deserve this end, "stated Jessica Rosenworcel, Commission Democrat commissioner. "The damage is important, new companies are going to be prevented and people's interests are turned away," said Democratic Congressman Mike Doyle, who announced that he is going to present a law to prevent deregulation. An initiative aimed at failing to almost monolithic opposition of Republicans to Obama's reform. Trump's anor hit on his legacy.