As time passes, we increasingly see inexpensive or completely free services become commercialized. This capitalist trend can give large businesses opportunities to influence civic decisions and change rules by manipulating information or interests. For example, 501(c)(4) organizations not only receive certain tax advantages but can also keep some financial activity undisclosed. Wealthy individuals can likewise spend significant resources to promote their political interests. One example discussed in this context is Bill Gates and charter-school ballot initiatives in Washington State, where repeated attempts were eventually followed by a successful 2012 campaign.
Similar tools are used in debates over net neutrality. We at SERVER1 support simple and open access to information and services. Without this principle, even SERVER1 itself could become less accessible to users.
Fast Lanes
This is a model of internet service that attempts to divide access into two basic groups: fast and slow lanes. Under such an approach, large companies such as Google, YouTube or Netflix may have to pay additional fees to provide faster service to users. This means that if you start a business in a field where at least one major company already operates, you could also be required to pay for fast-lane access. Otherwise, it may be difficult to remain competitive while being forced onto a much slower service tier.
Throttling
Throttling is a practice through which ISPs can intentionally provide slower internet service and then charge additional fees for premium access. Without protections for net neutrality, this can become a common business model.
Blocking
It can also become possible to intentionally block certain types of information, services, videos, articles and similar content, making them available only through subscriptions or additional payments.
The likely market impact of such changes is already clear, and in some places elements of this model already exist. Small and new businesses can be left with very limited opportunities unless they have large capital reserves or are prepared to operate at substantial losses at the beginning. This gives major companies additional tools to suppress new competitors while protecting their own comfortable market positions.
We often hear arguments about market self-regulation and strong competition, but these themes can also be promoted by organizations whose interests align with this type of service structure.
It is important for us to offer our customers the most favorable conditions possible. For that reason, we do not want them to be forced to operate in an unnecessarily restrictive environment.
Net neutrality can also reduce the risk of additional misinformation. When only a small number of very large companies control what type of information is distributed, it becomes much harder for other voices to be heard and serious questions can arise about the legitimacy and diversity of available information.
SERVER1 hopes that all of its customers will have the ability to express themselves, introduce innovative ideas, compete and offer services without having to worry about unfair pressure from dominant companies. Achieving this requires active public engagement.
An environment in which innovative ideas and interesting services can be presented freely is far more valuable both for us and for any new entrepreneur or creator. To preserve such an environment, we need to preserve net neutrality.
