net neutrality and the "best of the web"

An image I recently found while using StumbleUpon:



First of all, this isn't an actual service being provided by any company; it's a satire of sorts.

This is probably the most important image in all of the Net Neutrality debate (please click to enlarge). It captures what advocates of Net Neutrality fear of the day when telecommunication companies are allowed to regulate which websites get to be on a higher "tier." Take note of the small print at the bottom.

There is nothing on the books right now that prevents a company from offering a "Best of the Web."

So what's the big deal about a "Best of the Web" plan anyway? If a company wants to offer this service, and if you only use about 45 of the biggest web sites on a monthly basis, what's the big deal? That's the free market at work!

The problem is this: If one company does it and finds it profitable, then another company will do it too. Then others will follow suite. Soon after, full internet access will seem silly to everyone when only the "best" web sites get fast access because those have the highest demand and need the bandwidth. The smaller websites will still be out there on the "full" internet, but crippled on a bandwidth level.

Right now, you experience the free internet, otherwise known as a "neutral" internet. No company, to our knowledge, shapes traffic based on how much a web site can pay. Customers get the speed they pay for, be in 56k modems, DSL, cable, or any other level of speed. When we start hearing about telco companies giving any sort of preferential treatment to some web sites in any way, we will then know that legislation to maintain the free internet is necessary.