Creators and Net Neutrality
I wrote this as a companion article to Chris Oatley’s post on net neutrality: “Our Creative Future Is At Risk: What ‘Net Neutrality’ Means for Visual Storytellers”
“The internet is a series of tubes”
As creators, our audience pays for their connection (the “last mile”), and the more they pay the wider their driveway is. The wider the driveway, the more traffic it can handle and the faster the flow of cars (information) in and out. Driveways turn into lanes on the street and merge to become the roadways that cross the city, and highways that connect cities. On the other end, we similarly pay service providers/website hosts/etc, as middlemen, to create our roads. And all of that pays not only for our direct connections, but for maintenance and expansion (if any is put aside for it). So when the audience requests “one art please,” we load up Benny the Cab (Roger Rabbit’s car) and he delivers right to their door as fast as he can. It all works pretty well.
The FCC proposal, at the encouragement of Internet Service Providers (ISPs, a.k.a. Judge Doom), is to create lanes reserved for special non-toon traffic. “Internet fast lanes” that companies pay to use exclusively. They want to paint those lanes until they’re green with “the dip” (toon dissolving acid), leaving fewer lanes for everyone who isn’t paying Judge Doom’s toll. It will mean less efficiency overall, less speed and our Benny stuck in an artificially created gridlock while the larger company trucks stream by beside us.
The proposal places a scaling limit on our capacity to engage our audience. The slowdown may not be noticeable at first, only a cartoon shoe in a barrel, but just as the intent was always to dip all of Toontown, there’s no reason to think the ISPs will stop with large companies or a small portion of the lanes, either (and there’s no clearly defined limit in the proposal). Our livelihoods will basically depend on Judge Doom being “a nice guy”.
Money makes the world slow down
Setting aside that it’s strange (and unethical) to be selling a service they now claim they can’t provide, there’s already been attempts to alleviate traffic for ISPs (e.g. Content Delivery Networks (CDNs) and peering agreements). CDNs allow for the sending of cars/information from multiple depots spread out across the city, and other cities, that are closer to the audience, instead of from a central office (like distribution centres). Many content providers, large and small, use CDN services to improve the experience of their audience. Less distance to travel and less vehicles on the road for significant stretches of it benefits everyone, what’s not to like? The largest content provider, Netflix, even developed it’s own “Open Connect” network and offered it for free to ISPs, but was still forced to pay (Yes, Judge Doom actually demanded payment to accept free infrastructure and to lessen congestion). They’ve even threatened legal action when customers have been informed their connections are suffering for their refusals and have also tried to default on, or twist, peering agreements.
Even with these systems in place, ISPs still say they can’t handle the traffic, and that’s why they need “fast lanes” (for Netflix, that means they’d be charging 3 times for the same service, if you’re counting). Right now they claim it will only target the largest content providers, Netflix, Youtube, etc. But, even independent creators generate a lot more traffic through our large images, videos, podcasts, etc, than the average user. The same argument could very easily filter down to our levels.
It’s also worth mentioning how badly the U.S. compares to the rest of the world in terms of average speed and access. There are many factors involved, of course, but you have to ask if getting less than half the speed for four times the cost can be explained away, or wonder why countries with more difficult conditions still rank higher. The ISPs claim that additional charges will go to expanding their infrastructure, but there’s no mention or requirement for that in the proposal andcities and towns are already trying to make up for the past lack of progress, at least when they’re not being sued or blocked from doing so or prevented from usingexisting infrastructure. It’s more likely the proposal will discourage ISPs from investing in infrastructure, as they can just continually carve the existing networks into more and more “fast lanes”.
That’s no moon, it’s the end of the internet as we know it
The stability of the internet as a unified global force has always been tenuous, even more so with recent revelations. Most nations have been discouraged from splitting off their networks by virtue of the opportunity and real costs being too great to seriously consider. That disincentive erodes with the introduction of fast lanes, as it unbalances competition from existing companies in other nations. It also creates additional barriers for new entrants locally and internationally, and even as only a proposal it has already hurt competition and the creation of new businesses. It will even negatively effect education.
The new proposal also sets a precedent where ISPs have influence on how, or what, content flows through their systems. If the past is anything to go by, that’sprobably not a good idea, Judge Doom doesn’t play fair.
And it doesn’t end there. Free services such as comic hosting sites, video hosting, communities like artist hubs and gallery sites can’t afford to have their media heavy content discriminated against, or pay for it not to be. And if they have to pay for access to the audience, those costs will be passed on to us, the creators and may still not be sustainable. If you have a presence or reliance on these types of services or sites, on top of your own website, that means you may also end up paying three times for the same access to your audience that you have now.
Saving Toontown
More than just defeating the FCC proposal, we need to ensure a lasting solution.
Some suggest that the internet be reclassified as a common carrier (Title II telecommunications service). That classification is what protects against discrimination when it comes to phone lines. Without it, when you made a call you’d have to wait for an undefined period of time as you waited through a queue, and when it did connect you could never be sure of line quality, and might get cut off, regardless of your location/service. That’s what it means to have a lower priority than major companies who are tying up the infrastructure.
Other countries have managed to ensure net neutrality through very specific rulesaround service, something which was also just put on the table. But, there’s no silver bullet. It’s a complex subject and each method has it’s pros and cons. Preferably both, or more, should be applied for safety and continued equality.
If you agree we need net neutrality, know that there are many organizations(including tech giants) and groups who are fighting to keep the internet free and functional. To add your own voice to theirs, you must submit a comment before the first comment period ends on Tuesday, July 15th (tomorrow), with the chance for you to respond to other public comments occurring afterwards and until September 10th.
The EFF, which has actively fought for net neutrality for many years, has provided an easy form for you to make public comment to the FCC here (alternative).
(Comment directly. Or with attachments here using proceeding number 14-28. Or email directly: openinternet@fcc.gov)
(Comment directly. Or with attachments here using proceeding number 14-28. Or email directly: openinternet@fcc.gov)
And if you want to go the extra mile, the most effective things you can do is contact your elected officials through letter writing or phone calls (alternative), or by involving the media through letters to the editor.
And finally there are a number of petitions available (though their effectiveness isquestionable), such as one for startups and from the ACLU.
Thanks for reading and let’s keep fighting for a free and open internet!
Published by The Echo Inside.com
Published by The Echo Inside.com
from WordPress http://ift.tt/WdLpDO
via IFTTT
