Abstract
Net neutrality represents the idea that Internet users are entitled to service that does not discriminate on the basis of source, destination, or ownership of Internet traffic. The United States Congress is considering legislation on net neutrality, and debate over the issue has generated intense lobbying. Congressional action will substantially affect the evolution of the Internet and of future Internet research. In this article, we argue that neither the pro nor anti net neutrality positions are consistent with the philosophy of Internet architecture. We develop a net neutrality policy founded on a segmentation of Internet services into infrastructure services and application services, based on the Internet's layered architecture. Our net neutrality policy restricts an Internet service Provider's ability to engage in anticompetitive behavior while simultaneously ensuring that it can use desirable forms of network management. We illustrate the effect of this policy by discussing acceptable and unacceptable uses of network management.
- Bar, F., Cohen, S. S., Cowhey, P., DeLong, B. J., Kleeman, M., and Zysman, J. 2000. Access and innovation policy for the third-generation Internet. Telecommun. Policy 24, 489--518. http://repositories.cdlib.org/brie/BRIEWP137.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Bar, F. and Sandvig, C. 2000. Rules from truth: Communication policy after convergence. In Proceedings of the 28th Telecommunications Policy Research Conference.Google Scholar
- Bloomberg News. 2006. AT&T, Comcast Rout Google in ‘‘Net Neutrality’ Battle. Bloomberg News, July 20.Google Scholar
- Blumenthal, M. S. and Clark, D. D. 2001. Rethinking the design of the Internet: The end-to-end arguments vs. the brave new world. ACM Trans. Inter. Tech. 1, 1, 70--109. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Braden, R., Clark, D., and Shenker, S. 1994. Integrated services in the Internet architecture: An overview. Tech. rep., IETF. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Cannon, R. 2003. The legacy of the federal communications commission's computer inquiries. Federal Commun. Law J. http://www.cybertelecom.org/ci/index.htm.Google Scholar
- Clark, D., Wroclawski, J., Sollins, K., and Braden, R. 2005. Tussle in cyberspace: Defining tomorrow's Internet. IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw. 13, 462--475. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Farrell, J. and Weiser, P. 2003. Modularity, vertical integration, and open access policies: Towards a convergence of antitrust and regulation in the Internet age. Harvard J. Law Technol. 17, 85--134. http://ssrn.com/abstract=452220.Google Scholar
- FCC. 1971. First computer inquiry, final decision, 28 fcc2d 267.Google Scholar
- FCC. 1980. Second computer inquiry, final decision, 77 fcc2d 384.Google Scholar
- FCC. 2002. FCC 02-77 cable modem service order. http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-77A1.pdf.Google Scholar
- FCC. 2005a. FCC 05-150 Internet over wireline facility order. http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-150A1.pdf.Google Scholar
- FCC. 2005b. FCC 05-151 Internet policy statement. http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-151A1.pdf.Google Scholar
- Herman, B. D. 2007. Opening bottlenecks: On behalf of mandated network neutrality. Federal Commun. Law J. 59. http://ssrn.com/abstract=902071.Google Scholar
- Jordan, S. 2007. A layered network approach to net neutrality. Int. J. Commun. (to appear).Google Scholar
- Lehr, W. H., Gillett, S. E., Sirbu, M. A., and Peha, J. M. 2006. Scenarios for the network neutrality arms race. In Proceedings of the 34th Telecommunications Policy Research Conference.Google Scholar
- Lemley, M. A. and Lessig, L. 2001. The end of end-to-end: Preserving the architecture of the Internet in the broadband era. UCLA Law Rev. 48, 925--972. http://ssrn.com/abstract=259491.Google Scholar
- Lessig, L. 2001. The Internet under siege. Foreign Policy 127, 56--65.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- McTaggart, C. 2006. Was the Internet ever neutral? In Proceedings of the 34th Telecommunications Policy Research Conference.Google Scholar
- Owen, B. M. and Rosston, G. L. 2003. Local broadband access: Primum non nocere or primum processi?: A property rights approach. Stanford law and economics olin working paper no. 263. http://ssrn.com/abstract=431620.Google Scholar
- Peha, J. M. 2006. The benefits and risks of mandating network neutrality, and the quest for a balanced policy. In Proceedings of the 34th Telecommunications Policy Research Conference.Google Scholar
- Saltzer, J. H., Reed, D. P., and Clark, D. D. 1984. End-to-end arguments in system design. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 2, 4, 277--288. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Solum, L. B. and Chung, M. 2003. The layers principle: Internet architecture and the law. U. San Diego public law research paper No. 55. http://ssrn.com/abstract=416263.Google Scholar
- Speta, J. B. 2000. Handicapping the race for the last mile?: A critique of open access rules for broadband platforms. Yale J. Regulation 17, 39--91.Google Scholar
- U.S. Congress. 1984. S.66.PP, Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, 98th Congress, Public Law 98-549. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d098:s.00066:.Google Scholar
- U.S. Congress. 1992. S.12.PP Cable Television Consumer Protection Act of 1992, 102nd Congress, Public Law 102-385. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d102:s.00012:.Google Scholar
- U.S. Congress. 1996. S.652.PP Telecomunications Act of 1996, 104th Congress, Public Law 104-104. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d104:s.00652:.Google Scholar
- U.S. Congress. 2006a. H.R.5252.EH Advanced Telecommunications and Opportunities Reform Act, 109th Congress. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HR05252:.Google Scholar
- U.S. Congress. 2006b. H.R.5252.RS, Communications Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhancement Act of 2006, 109th Congress. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HR05252:.Google Scholar
- U.S. Congress. 2006c. H.R.5417.RH Internet Freedom and Nondiscrimination Act of 2006, 109th Congress. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.r.05417:.Google Scholar
- U.S. Congress. 2006d. Net Neutrality Act of 2006, 109th Congress, Proposed Amendment to H.R.5252. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HZ00987:.Google Scholar
- U.S. Congress. 2006e. S.2360.IS Internet Non-Discrimination Act of 2006, 109th Congress. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:s.02360:.Google Scholar
- U.S. Congress. 2006f. S.2917.IS Internet Freedom Preservation Act, 109th Congress. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:s.02917:.Google Scholar
- van Schewick, B. 2007. Towards an economic framework for network neutrality regulation. J. Telecommun. High Technol. Law 5. http://ssrn.com/abstract=812991.Google Scholar
- Werbach, K. D. 2002. A layered model for Internet policy. J. Telecommun. High-Tech Law 1. http://ssrn.com/abstract=648581.Google Scholar
- Whitt, R. S. 2004. A horizontal leap forward: Formulating a new Ccommunications public policy framework based on the network layers model. Federal Commun. Law J. 56, 587--672.Google Scholar
- Wu, D. and Negi, R. 2003. Effective capacity: A wireless link model for support of quality of service. IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. 2, 4, 630--643. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Wu, T. 2004. The broadband debate: A user's guide. J. Telecommun. High Technol. Law 3, 69--95. http://ssrn.com/abstract=557330.Google Scholar
- Yoo, C. S. 2005. Beyond network neutrality. Harvard J. Law Technol. 19, 1--77. http://ssrn.com/abstract=742404.Google Scholar
- Yoo, C. S. 2006. Network neutrality and the economics of congestion. Georgetown Law J. 94. http://ssrn.com/abstract=825669.Google Scholar
Index Terms
Implications of Internet architecture on net neutrality
Recommendations
Net neutrality
This paper is intended as an introduction to the debate on net neutrality and as a progress report on the growing body of academic literature on this issue. Different non-net neutrality scenarios are discussed and structured along the two dimensions of ...
Perspectives on Net Neutrality and Internet Fast-Lanes
"Net neutrality" and Internet "fast-lanes" have been the subject of raging debates for several years now, with various viewpoints put forth by stakeholders (Internet Service Providers, Content Service Providers, and consumers) seeking to influence how ...
Net Neutrality Discourses: Comparing Advocacy and Regulatory Arguments in the United States and the United Kingdom
Telecommunications policy issues rarely make news, much less mobilize thousands of people. Yet this has been occurring in the United States around efforts to introduce “Net neutrality” regulation. A similar grassroots mobilization has not developed in ...






Comments