Net Neutrality concerns, among many aspects, whether and on what basis Internet traffic can be prioritized. There are many sides to this issue, and the folks arguing do not even agree on the definition of Net Neutrality. See the wikipedia entry on Net Neutrality for an overview, but beware that it does not represent all views.

The FCC recently passed net neutrality regulations. The regulations contain a number of provisions. In this case study, we only consider the "no unreasonable discrimination" rule that is part of the FCC's Open Internet Order.

Net neutrality is the hottest current Internet public policy debate. It is likely that these regulations will be challenged in the courts. In addition, Congress continues to debate the issue.

Here are materials to prepare for the case study:

• My slides from lecture.
• Read the Congressional Research Service's Access to Broadband Networks, and Access to Broadband Networks: The Net Neutrality Debate to get an introduction to Net Neutrality and the issues surrounding it. These reports were prepared for members of Congress to learn about the issue.
• Read Background for net neutrality case study, which I wrote to give you background on technical and legal aspects underlying the issue.
• Read parts of the FCC's Open Internet Order, which implements regulations. Read their justification for creating regulations on pages 4-27. The provision we will focus on is the "no unreasonable discrimination" rule, which is discussed on pages 40-47. You can find the FCC commissioners' arguments for and against the Order on pages 135-194.

Here are links to media coverage:

• The New York Times net neutrality issue page.
• The Washington Post has frequent articles on the topic.
• National Public Radio has frequent pieces on the topic, including a primer by Planet Money.
• Los Angeles Times, Phone, Cable May Charge Dot-Coms That Want to Race Along the Internet (There are also more recent editorials.)
• The Wall Street Journal, The Web's Worst New Idea (There are also more recent editorials.)
• Moyers on America, The Net @ Risk (watch video or read transcript at http://www.pbs.org/moyers/moyersonamerica/net/neutrality.html)

Here are links to a few lobbyist arguments:

• Pro net neutrality video by savetheinternet.com
• Con net neutrality video by handsoff.org

Here are presentations to the FCC by both lobbyists and professors.

Review Lobbyists arguments for or against Net Neutrality in the Senate Commerce Committee hearings on the topic. Click on "Archive Webcast" (skip the first 12 minutes) and/or click on the names of people to read their written statements.

When you need some entertainment:

• Look at some of the advertisements on net neutrality that were placed in publications commonly read by congressional staffers.
• A description of net neutrality by Sen. Stevens, Chair of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation in 2006 (audio only).
• Coverage of net neutrality on The Daily Show.
• An amusing remix of Sen. Stevens comments.
• Net neutrality music.

If you are a Lobbyist:

• Pretend that the FCC's Order is being challenged in Congress. You are trying to convince Congress of your position. Your classmates are Senators.
• You should argue for or against the "no unreasonable discrimination" rule that is part of the FCC's Open Internet Order. "Net neutrality Pro" means you should argue for the "no unreasonable discrimination" rule and generally for prohibiting Internet Service Providers from unreasonable prioritization of Internet traffic. "Net neutrality Con" means you should argue against the "no unreasonable discrimination" rule and generally against prohibiting Internet Service Providers from unreasonable prioritization of Internet traffic.
• Quickly and concisely, define your position. Don't assume that the Senators know what the issue is or what your position is.
• Present your most persuasive arguments in the most powerful manner you can. However, be accurate.
• Include technical, economic, and public policy aspects. You don't need to answer all of the following questions, but you should have at least one technical argument, at least one economic argument, and at least one public policy argument.
• Technical questions:
  • On what basis will ISPs be allowed to prioritize packets?
  • Would Skype packets be prioritized?
• Economic questions:
  • Who could pay for prioritization?
  • Do the ISPs have market power? over what? Do application providers like Google have market power? over what?
• Public policy questions:
  • Does society as a whole have an interest in who provides what and who charges for what on the Internet?

If you are a Staffer:

• Try to convince your Senator what is best for your constituents.
• You can argue that they should vote for the FCC's "no unreasonable discrimination" rule, that they should vote against the FCC's "no unreasonable discrimination" rule, or that they should amend the rule in some specific way.
• Quickly and concisely, define your position. Assume that the class has heard the Lobbyist arguments.
• Include technical, economic, and public policy aspects. You don't need to answer all of the following questions, but you should have at least one technical argument, at least one economic argument, and at least one public policy argument.
• Technical questions:
  • On what basis will ISPs be allowed to prioritize packets?
  • Would packets used in Apple's FaceTime application be prioritized?
• Economic questions:
  • Who could pay for prioritization?
  • What approach would maximize social welfare?
• Public policy questions:
  • Is a "level playing field" the right goal? between whom?