We have written several articles about net neutrality and the challenges in maintaining an “open, interoperable and unified” Internet. Net neutrality implies that the Internet should be free of blockages, restrictions and artificial barriers amongst the various segments of the Internet. It is based on the principle that fixed network operators (FNO), mobile network operators (MNO) and Internet service providers (ISP) should allow access to all Internet content and applications without favoring or obstru
This article will address a few examples of Internet fragmentation for each of the three major categories defined in our previous articles of this series. These examples fall under the already defined technical, governmental and commercial forms of fragmentation. Remember: These are only a few examples of the more than 30 examples currently being studied.
Our last article about Internet fragmentation addressed the basic definitions of an open Internet and a fragmented Internet, and identified the three basic groupings of fragmentation. As you will recall, these forms include fragmentation caused by technology, the commercial market and government interests. In this article, we will briefly address several descriptive concepts and models used by experts in the field to analyze and understand fragmentation forms and activities.
Our recent articles about “net neutrality and the open Internet” address the debate about a single form of Internet fragmentation. Some believe that the “open, interoperable and unified” Internet is being threatened. In this article, we will introduce the general concepts and the trending forces that are beginning to fragment the Internet.
Common questions from various industry stakeholders:
The reality of the net neutrality debate is that some players in the game have a lot to win or lose depending upon the forthcoming decision by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. However it is very likely that the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals will not be final and will be appealed to the Supreme Court, regardless of what that decision will be. Until that time when the final decision is made, the Internet and all of the players I discuss below will continue doing what they do.
In this article, we are going to trace some of the changes in the telecom markets since the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was passed. For context, we will outline how the Internet and the telecommunications markets looked then, and how they have since changed. The Internet Service Providers (ISPs) that provide Internet access services primarily consists of three market segments- the mobile broadband market, the fixed broadband market (cable) and the fixed wire-line market.
On February 4, 2015, the FCC proposed to reclassify the Internet from an “information service” as defined in the U.S.C. 47 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Section 706 to a “communications service” and regulate it under Title II of the Telecommunications Act of 1934. The FCC then issued a new set of net neutrality rules under the 1934 Act on February 26, 2015. After these announcements, Vertex published a short article and suggested there would be several more years of legal, administrative and legislative positioning.
Net neutrality advocates are typically comprised of Internet consumers, Internet software companies and service companies like Google and Microsoft and related industry associations. Opponents mainly consist of free market evangelists, large Internet infrastructure companies like Comcast Cable and the wireless carriers and their industry associations. That leaves the FCC trying to carve out a position as the referee.
On Wednesday, February 4th, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman, Tom Wheeler, proposed to reclassify the Internet as a telecommunications service and to regulate it under Title II of the Telecommunications Act of 1934. His proposal would cover both wired and wireless Internet service providers. Currently the FCC has limited regulatory power over U.S.