No More Net Neutrality? Can Buster's Blog Survive?

What is "net neutrality"?  It's the concept that all internet traffic/data should be treated and delivered equally, from voice to video to email to online Korean instruction manuals.  Equal and open access for all.

Net neutrality has been defended by techies, geeks, hackers, gamers, populists, liberals, and Tim Berners Lee, the friggin' inventor of the internet.  The concept has been enforced the FCC.

It has been opposed by ISP's and telecoms (essentailly the same thing) like ComCast, Verizon, AT&T, Time Warner, and by conservative groups like the Cato Institute and Americans For Prosperity.

Verizon sued the FCC, and a federal court found for Verizon and ruled that the FCC has no enforcement authority in this area, since ISP's are technically not "common carriers", i.e. telephone companies.  (In a twist of logic, these companies are indeed common carriers in their phone incarnations, but when they put on their ISP pants, they become "information services".)

If ISP's no longer must be net neutral, what does that mean for you and me?  If we're lucky, nothing.  But don't bet on it, because it's all about the money.

Imagine walking into your public library one day to find that all classic literature and the modern-day best-sellers have been moved into a special wing and if you want to read any of 'em, you have to pay a fee.  But if you want hang out in the main area, for free you can read USA Today, Highlights For Children, sales brochures and Korean instruction manuals.  Worst case could be a little like that.

No enforceable net neutrality means ISP's could make the big content providers like Google, NetFlix or YouTube pay for prime access and speed.  But as wealthy content providers pay ISP's for faster delivery, other websites would slow down.

If popular content providers have to pay to play, then things could get weird and the ISP's could begin to shape Internet 2.0 in the form they know best, cable TV.  Suppose NetFlix decides to hop into bed with AT&T.  You'd still be able to access NetFlix with any ISP, but only with AT&T could you get it at their fastest download speed.  Or may be Wikipedia cuts an exclusivity deal and may only be accessed via Warner, and is blocked on other ISP's.  Or, most likely, your internet access is offered in bundles and packages and all that cable-style menu crapola:  the more you pay, the more websites you get.  

These are unhappy thoughts.

I'm no expert.  I know just enough to be dangerous.  But I know this:  If the telecom industry is promising that the court's ruling will mean more internet choice and competition and innovation, they've whistled that tune before and it's bullshit.  It means our internet bill is going up.

But don't blame me.  Shockingly, Buster's Blog has not been asked by any ISP to pay fees.  My four or five readers will continue to have unlimited access to Buster's at no charge whatsoever.  Indeed, I'm probably gonna have to start paying those people to keep reading it.