Changes

'''Network neutrality''' is a topic currently under debate regarding whether [[Internet service provider]]s have the right to charge [[website]]s on the [[internet]] for "premium" connections. Many contend that this is that this would disrupt the continuity of the online community by relegating unpopular and less affluent websites to "second class citizens" that would serve their pages much slower than the ones who can pay the bandwidth providers.  Others argue that a law requiring Network neutrality would prevent Internet service providers from providing superior services to those who need it.

'''Network neutrality''' is a euphemism for government control of the internet, ostensibly to ensure that [[Internet service provider]]s treat all traffic equally and continue to give high-traffic websites like [[Google]] a free ride.  [[Liberals]] in [[Washington, D.C.]] would then monitor and manage internet traffic under the guides of ensuring "eqwuality or "neutrality", when in fact the government would be interfering with the freedom and free market that has traditionally existed on the internet.

Some claim that unless net neutrality laws are passed, a new "tiered Internet" would develop. For example, Hollywood could offer multimedia content exclusively in a higher tier, which could be subject to the inclusion or exclusion of certain Web sites, eventually resulting in all major Internet sites abandoning the lower tier. Targets could include blogs opposing the agenda of the [[mainstream media]] or the governments of the world, and independent musicians not affiliated with [[RIAA]]-member labels. In addition, a company within an industry could make deals with an ISP, resulting in priority over competitors' Web sites - this also raises antitrust issues.<ref>http://news.cnet.com/Playing-favorites-on-the-Net/2100-1028_3-6003281.html?tag=txt</ref><ref>http://blogs.forbes.com/michaelnoer/2010/08/06/overturn-of-net-neutrality-will-inexorably-lead-to-censorship/?boxes=Homepagechannels</ref>

Supporters of net neutrality, such as Google, engage in favoritism of their own in supporting liberal causes, but want to prevent ISPs from having the same freedom.  The net neutrality supporters insists that a new "tiered Internet" would develop unless the government takes control with regulations. For example, they claim that Hollywood could offer multimedia content exclusively in a higher tier, which could be subject to the inclusion or exclusion of certain Web sites, eventually resulting in all major Internet sites abandoning the lower tier. Targets could include blogs opposing the agenda of the [[mainstream media]] or the governments of the world, and independent musicians not affiliated with [[RIAA]]-member labels. In addition, a company within an industry could make deals with an ISP, resulting in priority over competitors' Web sites - this also raises antitrust issues.<ref>http://news.cnet.com/Playing-favorites-on-the-Net/2100-1028_3-6003281.html?tag=txt</ref><ref>http://blogs.forbes.com/michaelnoer/2010/08/06/overturn-of-net-neutrality-will-inexorably-lead-to-censorship/?boxes=Homepagechannels</ref>

Many corporations and advocacy groups support neutrality regulations, while hardware companies and providers themselves tend to be against it. Some great figures of the internet also oppose it, such as David Farber, noted for major contributions to programming languages and computer networking, and Bob Kann, who helped invent the TCP/IP technologies used to transmit information on the Internet.

Many corporations and liberal advocacy groups support neutrality regulations, while hardware companies and providers and conservative groups tend to be against it. Some great figures of the internet also oppose it, such as David Farber, noted for major contributions to programming languages and computer networking, and Bob Kann, who helped invent the TCP/IP technologies used to transmit information on the Internet.

Internet providers, however, tend to see no need for increased regulation, and fear that with increased use of bandwidth through applications such as video downloads, their networks could be overloaded if they are not allowed to control them. Jim Cicconi, a high-level employee at AT&T, said that AT&T would be "very disappointed if [the FCC] has already drawn a conclusion to regulate wireless services despite the absence of any compelling evidence of problems or abuse that would warrant government intervention." Chris Guttman-McCabe, a vice president at wireless trade group CTIA, said "We are concerned about the unintended consequences that Net neutrality regulation would have on investments from the very industry that's helping to drive the U.S. economy." <ref>http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090919/ap_on_go_ot/us_internet_rules</ref>

Internet providers, however, tend to see no need for increased regulation, and fear that with increased use of bandwidth through applications such as video downloads, their networks could be overloaded if they are not allowed to control them. Jim Cicconi, a high-level employee at AT&T, said that AT&T would be "very disappointed if [the FCC] has already drawn a conclusion to regulate wireless services despite the absence of any compelling evidence of problems or abuse that would warrant government intervention." Chris Guttman-McCabe, a vice president at wireless trade group CTIA, said "We are concerned about the unintended consequences that Net neutrality regulation would have on investments from the very industry that's helping to drive the U.S. economy." <ref>http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090919/ap_on_go_ot/us_internet_rules</ref>