net_neutrality.txt

Dear <Senator/Representative>,


   As a concerned United States citizen and active voter, the recent dealings between Google & 
Verizon are cause for concern. The wording of their most recent deal gives way to the loss of net 
neutrality.
   
   Net Neutrality (the idea that all people who use Internet are given equal access to any site) is 
part of the core of the Internet and is the part of the reason for its rapid expansion as well as 
the freedom with which information can be distributed.
   
   The effects of such dealings, if allowed by the FCC, would give Verizon & Google the ability to 
limit access to online materials based on tiered pricing schemes. As it stands, tiered pricing for 
Internet access exists, but it affects the speed with which you can use the Internet, NOT what you 
have access to.
   
   Imagine a future where you, as an individual paying for Internet access, can no longer access 
websites like Gmail for your email, are unable to stream videos from services like iTunes/Netflix 
(which you have paid for) or have the speed with which you can browse non-premium sites (like Mom & 
Pop online stores) artificially limited. Imagine a future where political websites such as your own 
<URL here> are banned at the whim of a handful of corporation.
   
   These are very real concerns if net neutrality is not enforced. If you were unaware of the 
implications of the loss of net neutrality, I'd urge you to at least skim Wikipedia's entry 
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality) on the subject, which ironically could be another 
casualty of this loss.
   
   As someone who represents me in our government, I urge you to help preserve the freedom of 
information here in the United States and abroad. Please support the FCC's efforts to keep 
corporations from controlling access to the Internet & please help defeat any bills regarding net 
neutrality that promote corporate interests over those of the people. Thank you for your time & 
concern.


Sincerely,
Daniel Lindsley
Lawrence, KS 66047 

As someone who was once a proponent of net neutrality regulation and has, over the course of the last year, become a cynic, I'm not sure the assessment in this letter is particularly fair.

First of all, it seems like the appropriate solution to the problem is competition, not regulation. I understand that in wired Internet service, often consumers only have 1-2 providers to choose from, but it seems like that could be fixed by preventing telecom area monopolies (which the very FCC that you want to enforce net neutrality currently encourages).

Secondly, the scare situations in this email seem to be, even in the worst world imaginable, unlikely. A telecom is going to block Wikipedia? Really? Gmail, the location of a large percentage of users' emails? Can you imagine the complaints (and, eventually, cancellations) an ISP would get if they blocked Gmail? These are unrealistic examples. The same can be said of the political website example, which already falls under existing law. The U.S. already has laws on the books preventing companies from preventing user access to the messages of any political candidate -- so, for example, anyone running for political office MUST have their ads accepted by televisions stations, newspapers, etc. -- and this almost certainly would include broadband providers if such a case ever hit a court.

Similarly, it's not difficult to understand how net neutrality laws can be harmful. I, for one, would rather not introduce an entire new level of uncertainty into the market that prevents broadband providers from investing in additional infrastructure -- which would hurt everyone. Similarly, I don't trust government bureaucracy to adapt their regulation to new technology -- just look at the disaster that is software parents! :)

I'm not saying that telecoms are awesome and pure and altruistic (by no means). But, if I have to throw my lot with either the telecoms or with Congress, I'll take the telecoms ten times over.