Barbara van Schewick Discusses Net Neutrality and the Future of the Internet
Publication Date: May 10, 2023 4 minute read
Stanford Professor Barbara van SchewickNet neutrality at its heart is a really simple principle. It’s about this idea that we the people who use the internet get to decide what we do online. We get to decide what sites we want to visit, what apps to use, what videos to watch. And the companies that we pay to get online, you know, Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, they don’t get to interfere with our choices. When the internet is governed by net neutrality, then Comcast or AT&T does not get to block websites that we want to visit or they don’t get to slow down certain services and speed up others.
Professor Barbara van Schewick of Stanford Law School explains net neutrality on Stanford Engineering’s podcast, The Future of Everything. In “Net neutrality and the future of the internet,” Professor van Schewick talks about how the companies we pay to access the internet want control over what we do online and they want to charge more for data we are already paying for.
Professor van Schewick is a leading expert on net neutrality. Her book Internet Architecture and Innovation (MIT Press 2010, Paperback 2012) is considered to be the seminal work on the science, economics, and policy of network neutrality. She is a professor of law, and by courtesy, electrical engineering at Stanford Law School, and she is also the Director of Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society.
Regarding the role of large internet companies in net neutrality, Professor van Schewick recognizes the “huge power that these platforms, Google, Facebook, Twitter, have acquired over both speech that is relevant to democracy and to the market in general.” Though this does not have anything directly to do with net neutrality, because net neutrality applies to the companies that connect us to the internet. However, Professor van Schewick says:
It’s actually really critical if you are worried about the power of the large platforms. And here’s why. Basically, net neutrality protects the underdog, the new guy. It means that if Twitter does stuff that we disagree with or stops working randomly on a Wednesday afternoon, then we can go to a Twitter alternative, like Mastodon, and those Mastodon data packets aren’t stuck in the slow lane. So Mastodon gets to compete on an equal footing.
Below is an overview of Professor van Schewick’s discussion about net neutrality with Russ Altman on the Future of Everything podcast.
“Net Neutrality and the Future of the Internet” Barbara van Schewick with Russ Altman. Recorded February 24, 2023 by Stanford Engineering, The Future of Everything.
Summary
Net neutrality allows ordinary individuals to decide what they do online, and stops online service providers from interfering with users’ choices.
Main Points
- Net neutrality principles prohibit Internet Service Providers (ISPs) from examining the services delivered to users’ devices and interfering with users’ choices; net neutrality rules
- Bar ISPs from blocking certain sites.
- Stop ISPs from slowing down some services and speeding up others.
- Prevent ISPs from charging online service providers to offer a fast lane to consumers.
- Support innovation by allowing any service provider to reach consumers.
- Bar ISPs from blocking certain sites.
- In the mid-1990s, ISPs gained the power to examine packets traveling over the internet and take action based on the content of those packets.
- In Europe, which lacked net neutrality rules until 2015, some providers blocked access to online telephone services such as Skype.
- In the United States, net neutrality principles had bipartisan support, and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) barred ISPs from slowing or blocking online telephony.
- In Europe, which lacked net neutrality rules until 2015, some providers blocked access to online telephone services such as Skype.
- In 2017, the Federal Communications Commission eliminated federal net neutrality rules in the United States.
- Since 2017, service providers have begun to offer more plans that feature some type of price discrimination.
- Data plans that include congestion pricing or that reduce the quality of video access under some circumstances have proliferated.
- ISPs offer advantages to affiliated apps and preferred services, by stipulating that usage of app like Facebook and Twitter do not count against data caps.
- Data plans that include congestion pricing or that reduce the quality of video access under some circumstances have proliferated.
- Net neutrality rules would help address the power of large platforms, by ensuring that people can continue to access alternative and rival services; for example, net neutrality rules would ensure users looking for an alternative to Twitter can access Mastodon.
Conclusion
Net neutrality rules prevent ISPs from controlling users’ choice online. In the United States, net neutrality principles governed the Internet from its inception until 2017. In 2017, the FCC eliminated net neutrality rules. Since 2017, unlimited data service plans under which some services are favored or disfavored have proliferated. Some lawmakers are seeking to pass legislation to restore net neutrality rules.
video
“Net Neutrality and the Future of the Internet” Barbara van Schewick with Russ Altman. Recorded February 24, 2023 by Stanford Engineering, The Future of Everything.
- California Defends Its Net Neutrality Law
(Center for Internet and Society Blog, Stanford Law School, September 17, 2020) - Internet Architecture and Innovation
(The MIT Press, August 17, 2012) - The FCC is About to Repeal Net Neutrality. Here’s Why Congress Should Stop Them
(Medium, November 26, 2017)
About Barbara van Schewick
Barbara van Schewick is the M. Elizabeth Magill Professor of Law at Stanford Law School, Director of Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society, and Professor by courtesy of Electrical Engineering in Stanford University’s Department of Electrical Engineering. Her research focuses on the economic, regulatory, and strategic implications of communication networks. In particular, she explores how changes in the architecture of computer networks affect the economic environment for innovation and competition on the Internet, and how the law should react to these changes.
