Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Mac309 Net Neutrality 2008 9

369

Published on

Session slides used in the MAC309 workshop

Session slides used in the MAC309 workshop

Published in: Education, Technology, Business
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
369
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
9
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Net Neutrality MAC309
  • 2. 2 sides?
  • 3. T he layers principle
    • Content layer
    • Logical layer
    • Physical layer
  • 4. 1 – the content layer
  • 5. 2 – the logical layer
  • 6. 3 – the physical layer
  • 7. 1 – the content layer
    • Battle around copyright and intellectual property
    • T ougher laws
    • ISPs refusing to ‘police’ the ‘net
  • 8. 2 – the logical layer
    • B attle against software misuse
    • P2P, BitTorrent
    • Domain phishing
    • O pen source
  • 9. 3 – the physical layer
    • B attles around hardware
    • F ree wi-fi
    • Internet enabled devices
    • Generativity (Zittrain, 2008)
  • 10. ‘ Internet regulation is about more than just law’
    • Interaction between various aspects:
      • Legal
      • Technical
      • S ocial
      • Market
    • ‘ Net neutrality … is a debate about regulation and influence at the interface of the logical and physical layers’
      • (Ganley & Algrove, 2006: 456)
  • 11. B it parity INTERNET
    • A ‘dumb network’
    • A ll data packets treat the same
    • Devices at the end do the work
    • The network shows no preferences
    • S hould it stay this way?
  • 12.
    • ‘ Net neutrality means simply that all like Internet content must be treated alike and move at the same speed over the network. The owners of the Internet's wires cannot discriminate. This is the simple but brilliant "end-to-end" design of the Internet that has made it such a powerful force for economic and social good.’
      • Lessig & McChesney, 2006
  • 13. 2 tiered Internet?
  • 14. They who own the pipes, own the future …
    • Control in the hands of the network operators
      • (ie the ISPs)
    • Currently, ISPs attempt to manage traffic via:
      • A pplication of ‘bit parity’
      • C ontrol flow during peak times; certain data prioritised
      • 24/7 ‘deep packet inspection’ discrimination
  • 15.
    • Comcast (US) secretly disrupted customer connections when using BitTorrent application
      • Also interfered with other services (Lotus Notes)
    • Forced to reveal behaviour to FCC
    • Customers not entitled to use their bandwidth as they wish
      • Anderson, 2008
  • 16. INTERNET
  • 17. INTERNET
  • 18.
  • 19.
  • 20.
  • 21.
  • 22. Service provider discrimination
  • 23. VoIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) INTERNET
  • 24. INTERNET WTF!? I can’t hear U. T eh interwebs is borked!
  • 25. Application discrimination INTERNET That’s better! Lulz
  • 26. ISPs enter video market?
  • 27. T r affic management already happens
    • Blocking and tiering
    • 2004: ISP Madison River blocked Vonage’s VoiP services
    • 2006: ISP AOL blocked access to www.dearaol.com
    • 2007: ISP Comcast blocked BitTorrent
    • 2008: ISP Tele2 blocked access to http://thepiratebay.org
    • 2008: ISP Pakistan Telecom blocked YouTube
  • 28.
    • ‘ Any provider that blocks access to content is inviting customers to find another provider. And that’s just bad business.’
      • AT&T CEO Ed Whitacre, 2006, http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1035_22-147323.html
  • 29.
    • ‘ this net neutrality thing is a load of bollocks’
      • Virgin Media CEO Neil Berkett, 2008 http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/digitaltv/a93556/virgin-media-ceo-attacks-net-neutrality.html
  • 30.
  • 31.
  • 32. Who are the interested parties?
    • ISPs!
    • Large content providers (eg games developers, movie studios, etc)
    • Established online businesses
    • Police
    • Internet users!
  • 33. Infrastucture
    • The Internet as we know it is at breaking point
      • V ideo streaming
      • P2P
      • VPN
    • 2006: BT invested £10 billion in 21CN
    • July 2008: BT announced further £1.5 billion investment in NGA
    • 40 Mb/s to 10m homes by 2010
    • Cost to update entire UK: £25 billion
  • 34. ISPs on infrastructure proportionality
    • ‘‘ They don’t have any fibre out there. They don’t have any wires. They use my lines for free – and that’s bull. For a Google or a Yahoo or a Vonage or anybody to expect to use these pipes for free is nuts!’’
      • AT&T CEO Ed Whitacre , 2006
  • 35. Who to charge?
    • Successful content providers?
    • Customers?
      • A lready been paying for years?
    • Are ISPs even entitled to a cut of the revenue for a successful service like eBay, YouTube, Facebook, etc?
      • What impact will this have on new services?
      • What impact will this have on end-users?
  • 36. Irony?
    • Pro-net neutrality = regulation
    • Anti-net neutrality = ISPs free reign
    • R e gulation usually stifles competition but in this case will it do the opposite?
      • The early Internet was largely unregulated
  • 37. F r om Digital Britain 2008 report:
    • [ISPs] can take action to manage the flow of data … on their networks to retain levels of service to users or for other reasons. The concept of so-called ‘net neutrality’, requires those managing a network to refrain from taking action to manage traffic on that network. It also prevents giving to the delivery of any one service preference over the delivery of others . Net neutrality is sometimes cited by various parties in defence of internet freedom, innovation and consumer choice. The debate over possible legislation in pursuit of this goal has been stronger in the US than in the UK.
  • 38. F r om Digital Britain 2008 report:
    • Ofcom has in the past acknowledged the claims in the debate but have also acknowledged that ISPs might in future wish to offer guaranteed service levels to content providers in exchange for increased fees. In turn this could lead to differentiation of offers and promote investment in higher-speed access networks. Net neutrality regulation might prevent this sort of innovation .
  • 39. F r om Digital Britain 2008 report:
    • Ofcom has stated that provided consumers are properly informed, such new business models could be an important part of the investment case for Next Generation Access, provided consumers are properly informed.
    • On the same basis, the Government has yet to see a case for legislation in favour of net neutrality . In consequence, unless Ofcom find network operators or ISPs to have Significant Market Power and justify intervention on competition grounds, traffic management will not be prevented.
  • 40. Questions
    • Where does this debate lead to?
    • What are the implications of a two-tiered Internet?
  • 41. Role play
    • See role play handouts
  • 42. Asides
    • Google wants its own fast track on the Web
      • http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122929270127905065.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
    • Bloggers trash Journal’s tale of cyber queue-jumping
      • http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/dec/21/blogging-google-wall-street-journal-murdoch
    • The made-up drama’s of the Wall Street Journal
      • http://www.lessig.org/blog/2008/12/the_madeup_dramas_of_the_wall.html
    • Do we need a new Internet?
      • http://futureoftheinternet.org/do-we-need-a-new-internet

×