“It’s hard to imagine life today without the Internet– any more than we can imagine life without running water or electricity.” Said FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski in his recent remarks on preserving Internet freedom and openness. He believes that the reason the Internet has had such great success is because it provides everyone with equal ability to speak, innovate, and engage in commerce without having to ask any one’s permission. This principal of unrestricted free and open Internet is known as network neutrality.
Lately, many people have started to threaten the concept of network neutrality on the Internet, mainly the Internet service providers (ISPs), which have natural business incentives to keep themselves and their customers happy. There’s also content publishers who fear the digital age will crush their copyright privileges and allowances. There is no doubt that the Internet is the future of publishing anything like TV, movies, music, books, and newspapers.
Technologies like bit torrent and peer-to-peer (P2P) file sharing distribute information across the Internet with amazing efficiency. In general, this information is being distributed legally and is not subject to copyright, but that is not always true. Popular websites like thepiratebay.org/ are clearly distributing copyrighted content and ISPs are known for intentionally slowing this type of traffic in the interest of maintaining their quality of service.
Currently, ISPs like Comcast and Time Warner offer unlimited data plans. Most people probably don’t even know what unlimited data means, because they just expect the Internet to work. Anytime you request anything over the Internet, it is downloaded to your computer. The technology is generally non-discriminatory and the network views all traffic equally. Data can be rendered as text, audio, or video, but all of it is still merely packets of ones and zeros. Browsing normal websites on the Internet for a few hours might equal approximately 20 megabytes, downloading torrents at a decent speed for the same time could equal over 2,000 megabytes. Under an unlimited data plan the data usage is not recorded or monitored, and users are free to download as much as they want. Some ISPs, like Comcast, have recently implemented a new policy that denies service to customers that download over 250 gigabytes per month.
The problem with unlimited data plans is that they cause unlimited problems with usage, bandwidth, and policy. Consumers do not have to think about the consequences of their actions on the Internet. The problems are also amplified by new technologies and services like HD video, Youtube, and Netflix video streaming that add unimaginable stress to the networks involved. It is not uncommon for users to have a computer running all day while constantly uploading and downloading information, and also taking up a lot of bandwidth. User speed and the overall quality of service will suffer to varying degrees depending on the network architecture.
In an effort to combat these problems the ISPs have broken the rules regarding Internet neutrality by preventing users from accessing websites of their choice, and without disclosure. This is called traffic shaping. Normally, data packets are processed in the order they are received, and are not analyzed and routed based on criteria such as the source of the traffic, the type of traffic, or even the content of the traffic. ISPs use traffic shaping to help their networks endure the massive bandwidth sinks that can be caused by P2P file sharing, online gaming, and spam. There are certain legitimate uses for traffic shaping like spam, worms, viruses, and malicious attacks. However, any traffic shaping should be fully disclosed by the ISPs, and an agreement tailored for each customer based on their preferences.
I believe that everyone might benefit more from a usage-based pricing model. Customers need to, at the very least, be held accountable for how much data they download. After all, the Internet is a resource that uses massive amounts of energy, and still most take it for granted. Other essential and limited resources are regulated. For example, it would not be acceptable for someone to leave their water running all day and receive the same billing as someone who conserves their water by using appropriate practices. This same principle could resolve a lot of the Internet’s problems.
Case in point; I recently changed my cell phone data plan with AT&T from unlimited data to 2 gigabytes per month and was very satisfied with the results. The best part about the change is that I’m using the phone just as much, but my bill is lower and I recognized that my service is more consistent and reliable. Because of AT&T’s restructuring of their data plans, it has allowed them to expand their network and maintain reasonable quality of service.
The complicated part of adopting a usage-based pricing model for data plans is, obviously, setting the prices. The rates will have to be constantly tweaked and updated whenever there are significant changes in technology and the economy. Data plans should be priced lower than what AT&T or other ISPs currently market them as, and also incorporate some kind of tiered pricing model that is fair to both the casual and extreme users. For example, the cost of using only 1 gigabyte a month could be $1 while the cost of using 1,000 could be $100. Another advantage is that prices can only go down with time, as networks become more efficient the cost to maintain them will go down. Private networks with unlimited data transfer should still be available for large organizations and these pricing changes should encourage more networks to be built which is ultimately good for the Internet.
Usage-based pricing could be the key to saving the Internet and network neutrality. Normal customers don’t really “need” unlimited data plans. There needs to be correlation between data used and price paid so that customers are held responsible for their actions. In turn, this should relieve the pressure on ISPs, reduce illegal data transfers, reduce most customers monthly bill, increase network quality, and preserve network neutrality.