Over the past ten years, the debate over "network neutrality" has remained one of the central debates in Internet policy. Governments all over the world have been investigating whether legislative or regulatory action is needed to limit the ability of providers of Internet access services to interfere with the applications, content and services on their networks. Net neutrality comprises two separate non-discrimination commitments. Backward-looking ‘net neutrality lite’ claims that Internet users should not be disadvantaged due to opaque and invidious practices by their current Internet Service Provider (ISP). Forward-looking ‘positive net neutrality’ is a principle whereby higher Quality of Service (QoS) for higher prices should be offered on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms to all-comers. Neither extreme in the debate is an optimum solution. There is too much at stake to expect government to supplant the market in providing higher-speed connections, or for the market to continue to deliver without basic policy and regulatory backstops to ensure continued openness. Permitting content discrimination on the Internet will permit much more granular knowledge of what an ISP’s customers are doing on the Internet. A co-regulatory regime will ensure oversight and remove the most obvious abuses by fixed and mobile ISPs. Beyond rules that forbid network providers from blocking applications, content and services, non-discrimination rules are a key component of any network neutrality regime.
This analytical study provides background on the debate over network neutrality, including the implications for business models going forward that have been attempted and that are currently in play. This article explains for a global policy audience what the regulatory and governance problems and potential solutions are for the issue referred to as ‘network neutrality’, unpacking its ‘lite’ and ‘heavy’ elements. Eschewing technical, economic or legalistic explanations previously tackled elsewhere, it explains that increasing Internet Service Provider (ISP) control over content risks not just differentiated pricing and speed on the Internet. It explains that a co-regulatory regime may ensure regulatory oversight and remove obvious abuses by fixed and mobile ISPs, without preventing innovation, while guarding against government abuse of the censorship opportunities provided by new technologies.
Table of Contents
I INTRODUCTION
II DEVELOPING BUSINESS MODELS
An Emergence of the two-lane model
Openness in the public Internet lane
Quality guarantees in the managed services lane
III Future business models combining quality guarantees and openness
IV Evidence-based net neutrality regulation
Research Objectives and Core Topics
The primary objective of this study is to examine the multifaceted debate surrounding network neutrality and its implications for future business models in the Internet sector. The research investigates the regulatory challenges inherent in balancing the open nature of the public Internet with the emergence of managed services, while determining how to foster innovation and competition without resorting to premature or overly prescriptive legislative actions.
- The differentiation between the "public Internet lane" and the "managed services lane."
- Impact of network neutrality regulations on ISP business models and competition.
- Technical and economic challenges associated with implementing Quality of Service (QoS) guarantees.
- Regulatory strategies to ensure consumer transparency and prevent anti-competitive behavior.
- Assessment of future market scenarios for a multi-lane Internet environment.
Excerpt from the Book
Quality guarantees in the managed services lane
An attractive feature of the managed services lane is the ability to guarantee the quality of the service and applications that are delivered. Since the ISP has detailed knowledge of the services that it has agreed to deliver to the end users, it can apply traffic management measures tailored to the specific services involved. This is typically done by combining the IP QoS mechanisms with bandwidth reservations at the layers below the IP layer. The technology to provide QoS assurance on an end to end basis through the entire Internet has been reasonably implementable for perhaps a dozen years, yet there is hardly any actual implementation between ISPs, even though QoS is commonly implemented within an ISP. There are technical challenges, to be sure, notably including a lack of standardization of QoS levels; however, the absence of QoS aware interconnection has much more to do with economic and business factors than with technical ones. Among the practical challenges are:
• Limited demonstrated consumer willingness to pay for QoS, presumably because performance in the absence of guarantees is nonetheless sufficient for most purposes.
• Network effects and the initial adoption hump: QoS-aware interconnection has little value until and unless critical masses of ISPs implement it.
• Challenges in verifying that the other network has in fact delivered the service that it has committed: This difficulty is compounded by the understandable reluctance of network operators to make the internal performance of their networks visible to their competitors.
Chapter Summaries
I INTRODUCTION: This chapter defines network neutrality and identifies key areas of concern such as anti-competitive behavior, freedom of expression, and privacy in the context of traffic differentiation.
II DEVELOPING BUSINESS MODELS: This section details the emergence of the "two-lane model," contrasting the best-effort nature of the public Internet with the guaranteed quality offered by managed services.
III Future business models combining quality guarantees and openness: This chapter evaluates potential evolutionary scenarios for the Internet, assessing their impact on competition, innovation, and consumer welfare.
IV Evidence-based net neutrality regulation: This chapter argues for a flexible, proactive regulatory approach that focuses on monitoring and transparency rather than immediate, restrictive legislation.
Keywords
Net Neutrality, Internet Provider, Non-Discrimination, Quality of Service, QoS, Two-Lane Model, Managed Services, Public Internet, Regulation, Competition, Innovation, Deep Packet Inspection, Traffic Shaping, Internet Policy, Transparency.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental issue addressed in this study?
The work examines the debate over network neutrality, specifically investigating how ISPs manage traffic and whether regulatory intervention is necessary to prevent discrimination against content and applications.
What are the central thematic areas of the research?
The central themes include the trade-off between openness and quality guarantees, the emergence of the two-lane Internet model, and the role of regulation in complex, multi-sided markets.
What is the primary research goal?
The goal is to provide a balanced analysis of regulatory problems and solutions, emphasizing the need for future-proof, evidence-based policies that do not hinder innovation.
Which scientific methodology is applied?
The study employs an analytical and qualitative assessment, reviewing current market trends, regulatory frameworks, and economic scenarios to draw evidence-based conclusions.
What topics are covered in the main body?
The main body covers the technical and economic distinction between public and managed services, scenario planning for future Internet evolution, and specific policy recommendations for national regulators.
Which keywords characterize this work?
The work is characterized by terms such as Net Neutrality, Quality of Service (QoS), Non-Discrimination, Managed Services, and Regulatory Oversight.
How does the "two-lane model" impact the public Internet?
The two-lane model allows ISPs to reserve dedicated bandwidth for specific services, which can potentially lead to decreased quality for services in the public, best-effort lane due to shared infrastructure capacity.
Why are "Quality of Service" (QoS) guarantees difficult to implement?
Implementation is hindered more by economic and business challenges—such as the lack of inter-ISP agreements and limited consumer willingness to pay—than by technical limitations.
What is the author's stance on immediate legislative action?
The author advises against premature or overly prescriptive regulation, suggesting instead that regulators should first gain more experience with existing frameworks before imposing new obligations.
What role does Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) play in this debate?
DPI is identified as a tool that could be used in any market scenario; while it raises privacy concerns regarding data usage and retention, it is not a sufficient reason to prefer one evolutionary scenario over another.
- Quote paper
- Anurag Rana (Author), 2014, Net Neutrality. Developing Business Model and Evidence Based Net Neutrality Regulation, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/274066
