“Net Neutrality” refers to the concept of an “open Internet” whereby end-users can access the lawful content, applications, services and devices of their choice. Policymakers around the world are considering whether and how to ensure that the Internet remains “open” and Internet access service providers do not improperly block or degrade content sent over their networks.
This article examines the legal and political hurdles with the FCC’s net neutrality proposal to reclassify the Internet as a public utility. Christopher Yoo, director for the Center for Technology, Innovation & Competition at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, is quoted.
This article examines the legal and political hurdles with the FCC’s net neutrality proposal to reclassify the Internet as a public utility. Columbia Law School professor Tim Wu argues that reclassification as a Title II telecommunications common carrier would be achievable.
"What the court said is, they had to allow for some degree of negotiation between the two parties, which might result in different agreements in different cases out of those negotiations." — Kevin Werbach, Professor of Legal Studies and Business Ethics, The Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania
"We don't say the electricity companies should be charging the air conditioning producers for the fact that they create all this demand for electricity." — Barbara van Schewick, Professor, Stanford University
"The 'Common Carrier' regime has always acknowledged that providers can create different classes of service as long as they charge everyone who wants that class of service the same amount....it wouldn’t prevent internet service providers from creating a fast lane in the first place." — Christopher Yoo, Professor, University of Pennsylvania
This article delves into reactions to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler‘s net-neutrality proposal. Stanford University professor Barbara van Schewick’s efforts to raise awareness of the consequences of a proposed paid prioritization option for Internet traffic are outlined.
Stanford Law professor Barbara Van Schewick said the FCC can't ban paid deals without reclassifying broadband. If the agency chooses to follow Mr. Wheeler's plan, she said, it must allow broadband providers to strike the deals with content companies to enforce the no-blocking rule.
"If we want an open Internet and the rules necessary to preserve it, we have to continue to make our voices heard and work hard to educate and convince the FCC, the White House, and members of Congress. The future of the Internet depends on it." — Barbara van Schewick, Professor, Stanford University
"I thought of it as a kind of perpetual frontier, the place where everyone gets a shot, where the underdogs have a chance. The Internet has been that. And I wanted some principles that would keep it that way." — Tim Wu, Professor, Columbia University
"It’s like FedEx. You pay a certain amount for overnight delivery and a certain amount for two-day delivery. You could end up with something like that for the Internet." — Philip Weiser, Dean, University of Colorado Law School
Select an Issue
TAP Academics
View all academics with expertise in Net Neutrality
TAP Blog
Stanford law professor Barbara van Schewick explains why AT&T’s decision to suspend its sponsored data program is a “win for an open and free internet.”
March 26, 2021
View all blog posts about Net Neutrality
Upcoming Events
There are currently no upcoming events about Net Neutrality. Please see our events calendar for all upcoming events.
Fact Sheets
Given the significance of the Internet, preserving its “openness” – an idea often referred to as “network neutrality” or “net neutrality” – has been a long-standing issue.
Featured Article
This paper looks at ideas to support open access to the Internet, including net neutrality rules.
June 4, 2003
View all articles on Net Neutrality