Should Net Neutrality Be Embraced?

Net is a group of at least two devices that can be used for communication. It consists of several dissimilar computerized systems linked by wireless or physical connections. All nets allow computers and or people to share resources and information.

Net neutrality can be described as an idea in which the association between a person and the Internet’s content should not be modified by Internet service providers (ISPs). In this concept, ISPs avail fair access to the content on the Internet with no manipulation of data transfer and treat all traffic in webs in an equal manner (Raleigh, 2015). The concept states that a public information network that has a maximal usefulness aspires to treat all sites, content and platforms fairly.

Lack of Forms of Paid Prioritization

Many conversations surrounding innovation and net neutrality are narrowly frustrating. The edge application layer is only innovation which has got prestige in the wider conversation of the public. The makers of policies should appreciate and uphold innovation at both the application layer and within networks. Traffic spikes which are randomly combined may come together leading to congestion. Some applications are unable to tolerate a lot of delay. Such applications are real-time services like teleconferencing and VoIP. Real-time services such as Skype can be made functional to some extent without unique prioritization. In poor connections, it is hard to utilize real-time services confidently. Many exciting innovations require reliable connections. Some applications affirmatively require prioritization while others can work under the delays (Bauer & Knieps, 2015, March). The regulation of network neutrality should evolve to avail better quality services to dissimilar customers over similar networks. Paid prioritization should be established. The regulation should be tweaked to make sure innovation keep on flourishing. There should be establishment of rules which protect traffic delivery as they allow for competition to enhance upgrades in speed and provision of pace for network innovation. However, paid prioritization should not be included in basic websites and networks. Acknowledged independent third parties should be tasked to review and oversee the activities of ISPs to ensure basic websites and networks are not prioritized. There is a need for future research on the effects of prioritization to make the public know whether the policy is of use or not.

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

Lack of Open Internet Rules

The net neutrality regulation does not avail open rules for the Internet. The policymakers should give the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) a realistic and restricted jurisdiction to enforce open Internet policies (Arditi, 2019). A new title of the Communications Act should get a concession concerning the capacity of jurisdiction of FCC. The title should focus mainly on setting open rules of the Internet and linking the divided digital world. This will leave a wider update to the Communications Act in the future. The law enforcers should ensure Internet users and ISPs comply with the rules. This will increase the effectiveness of network neutrality. Additionally, there is a need for future research on open rules of the Internet to ensure the impact of the rules on net neutrality. This will open a space for any changes if need be.

Lack of Source of Money for Broadband Implementation and Digital-Literacy Programs

The regulation focuses narrowly on network neutrality issues and fails to include source of money for adoption of broadband and digital-educational programs (McMurria, 2016). The regulation should broaden the scope of the legislation and include a source of capital for adopting broadband and digital-educational programs. An independent acknowledged third party should then be used to measure and review the effectiveness of the source of funding. Researchers should conduct research to enhance the public know whether the policy included was effective or not.

Conclusion

Net neutrality should be embraced and changes made where necessary. The regulation of network regulation should be expounded to create a policy which avails a source of funding for broadband implementation and digital-educational programs. Lawmakers should create a space for price prioritization to enhance innovation. Open rules for Internet should be put in place to enhance positive development in the future.

References

1. Raleigh, G. G. (2015). U.S. Patent No. 9,014,026. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
2. Arditi, D. (2019). Net Neutrality, the Value Gap, and Corporate Interests. The Dialectic of Digital Culture, 13.
3. Bauer, J. M., & Knieps, G. (2015, March). Innovational Complementarities and Network Neutrality. TPRC.
4. McMurria, J. (2016). From Net Neutrality to Net Equality. International Journal of Communication (19328036), 10.