Summary: The Debate Over Network Neutrality

My first example is the current debate over network neutrality. Today, increasing numbers of Americans access the Internet through network providers, either DSL companies or cable companies.1 These companies act as conduits for the speech of others. Hence, we depend on them for access to other speakers, just as we depend on traditional telephone service. However, network providers are not currently subject to non-discrimination regulations like the common carriage requirements that apply to traditional telephone service.2 This creates several possible dangers. First, network providers might want to favor the content and applications of some speakers and businesses over others.3 They might block access to disfavored sites and services or permit access to end-users only if these sites or services pay a special fee.4 For example, the Associated Press recently discovered that Comcast had secretly blocked use of a file sharing service called BitTorrent, which is used to move large files across the Internet.'

7 Third, network providers might want to give a traffic advantage to their content partners or to their own content, 8 reserving a fast track for favored content partners-like movie studios or television networks-who want their streaming media to flow uninterrupted to consumers; conversely, network providers would not protect the flow of content (or even slow down content) from non-partners, competitors, amateurs, and end-users.0 The principle of network neutrality holds that, in general, network providers may not discriminate against content, sites, or applications."' Putting the principle into practice is more complicated than it might at first