Hello Class,

Currently, there are questions over whether it is permissible for ISP’s (major U.S. providers include Comcast, Verizon and AT & T) to control aspects of speed and delivery of content on their networks to their subscribers. Many subscribers and sites have complained about these practices, asserting that the ISPs should handle all content the same. What organization or governmental entity should handle this? How should it be resolved?

Internet service providers are providing a useful, and almost necessary service to consumers and their unbiased approach to providing that service should be enforced. Unfortunately the government has not always taken the right approach in regards to monopolies, and neutrality of services provided to citizens. On one hand these are private companies, and as such they are allowed to in essence act in a manner that favors stakeholders over their customers. The company is there to make money, plain and simple. If they are going to charge more through prioritization, which then throttles down other customers well then that is their prerogative. On the other hand, companies in such a place of power that operate without prejudice should not be inhibiting customers due to their inability to pay the higher prices that allow them to not be throttled. It is a slippery slope that skirts the lines of how a company is allowed to operate, but not to the point where the government is dictating to the point of stifling innovation or even the government controlling the industry. The Federal Communications Commission has jurisdictional authority over this industry, and as such public opinion should have a greater input to how the FCC regulates ISP’s. It shouldn’t be difficult for ISP’s to provide a service to customers while separating potential business owners from prices, and speeds offered. Internet services provided to businesses should be separated from individuals, that way there won’t be an issue with prioritization of services delivered.

1. Discuss the impact of California Laws over ISP traffic content regarding the above cases.

California regulators decided that companies providing an internet service to individuals could no longer slow down or block access to companies that don’t pay a premium price to the ISP’s. One major impact was through the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that upheld the law after tech companies appealed it. Since the 9th Circuit is a federal court, the ruling upheld is more impactful since the federal court set a precedence on a state ruling. The more impactful event from California’s law was that “seven states and Puerto Rico enacted their own net neutrality policies.” (AP, 2022) This further solidifies the fact that states can pursue their own versions of net neutrality with or without guidance from the FCC.

Discuss the approaches to Internet jurisdiction based on laws of different countries.

1. Countries are governing the internet based on their societal norms, and in some cases their type of governmental authority. Comparing and contrasting the great differences between countries and how they handle the internet relies on many societal, economical, and their government type. To put it in perspective, using personal experiences of the United States and comparing it to the Peoples Republic of China would bring to light many stark, and profound differences. The PRC uses an authoritative approach to governing access to the internet for their citizens. The great firewall of China is a real thing that truly limits access to the greater internet for their citizens. One recent development was the PRC limiting access for children to playing video games for nor more than 3 hours a week. Not only does the PRC limit the children’s access to video games, but “the rules will apply to companies providing online game services.” (Feiner, et. al 2021) The law is stipulating guidance for companies, not just the citizens. The companies must keep logs of real-name registrations, which is completely allowing the government to keep tabs on people with true “know your customer” registrations. If this were attempted in the United States, civil liberty organizations would be filing lawsuits left and right to get that type of law struck as unconstitutional. This same type of reaction is not allowed in the PRC.