With the issue of network neutrality arising, David Farber expresses his side of the argument. His opinion is that network neutrality may seem fair for the users and that network services seems to be secretive to its customers, however that is not the case. He portrays the downsides of the attempts of the government leaning over network neutrality and the most reasonable way for services and users to cooperate. This way, he has a strong stance for his side of the issue of network neutrality. (Farber, 2009)
David Farber’s initial point about the Internet is that it is constantly evolving thus it requires monitoring on a scale that will help both service providers and consumers. He examines the previous occurrences of the history of the Internet in which the constant and sudden changes forced brief decisions from the government and the FCC to make decisions crippling the Internet. For instance, David Farber states the changes
…show more content…
He emphasizes a crucial example that supports his claim, in which the Telecommunications Act in 1996 hurt numerous companies by the loss of money. In addition the FCC also is not a formidable party that are capable of making careful decision that will not hurt Internet service providers, “The FCC has a minimum amount of technical knowledge about the Internet and thus even when it acts, often misses the mark and can end up in lengthy court actions that an innovative new company cannot survive” (Farber, 2009). He’s concerned that the decisions regarding the Internet will be legislative. Essentially, David Farber’s point is that groups such as the FCC or the Congress who are not completely involved in the changes and events that occur to the Internet should not be able to make major decisions concerning the Internet; the past proves the potential