The information super tollgate
2009-10-02 10:47
Right now, in an ordinary office tower a few blocks from the Whitehouse, the future of the internet is being decided. Will it remain a vast, messy, democratic source of information for public good, or will it become a collection of exclusive enclaves - digital country clubs with high walls and even higher fees?
The office in question is occupied by the Federal Communications Commission that regulates all electronic communication in the USA, including broadband.
They are currently reviewing the rules that govern how internet service providers (ISPs) and other broadband carriers (like cable TV companies) control the flow of data around and between their networks.
If this doesn't sound particularly significant, think about it this way: without rules there's nothing to stop one network from blocking certain kinds of data from another. So if you're on provider A and they have a service that competes with a cheaper offering on provider B, they can simply block access to the competing service and force you to use their offering.
This is may seem like quite an extreme example but Comcast, the USA’s largest cable network, are currently suing the FCC for the right to block or "throttle" (artificially slow down) the bandwidth of certain users.
These users were exchanging large amounts of data over "peer to peer" networks - behaviour which cost Comcast money. They have claimed that they block such services because they are full of pirated copies of music, movies and other goodies but most commentators see this as a convenient excuse to drive down their costs.
But this flies against one of the founding principles of the internet - that all traffic should be treated equally. This is vitally important because it ensures that information and services are available to everyone who can connect - regardless of income or geographical location.
This principle, called "network neutrality" (or "net neutrality" for short), means that a nine-year-old in a library in Bangalore has access to the same information online as a billionaire in Silicone Valley.
So far, so utopian. But the network operators see things from another perspective. Why should the occasional user be charged the same flat rate as the geek who spends all day online? Why should video content have to sit in the same queue as email which isn’t remotely as time sensitive?
They have a point, but luckily there is a middle ground. Many net neutrality advocates, including Tim Berners-Lee (founder of the World Wide Web), believe that network operators should be allowed to charge for higher quality access - as long as it’s not at the expense of other users and networks.
Regardless of what network operators may feel, the FCC's position was made abundantly clear by their new (Obama appointed) chairperson Julius Genachowski in a speech on 21st September. Openness will be preserved, discrimination will be banned and transparency will be enforced. All in all it’s a home run for net neutrality.
Why does any of this matter to us bandwidth starved South Africans? Simple: we have lived through the polar opposite of net neutrality, also known as the Telkom monopoly. We have suffered the 500MB data caps and the two-day outages. We know exactly how important openness and competition is.
Now that our broadband market is finally opening up we have a chance to push for the same rules that have made the USA the most innovative internet market in the world. As consumers, network operators and governments we have a chance to make a difference. Let's not let it pass us by.
- Alistair is Social Media Manager at 20FourLabs.
Send your comments to Alistair
Disclaimer: News24 encourages freedom of speech and the expression of diverse views. The views of columnists published on News24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of News24.
- News24