The EU’s big step towards net neutrality

As the FCC's comment system crashes in the US due to the barrage of comments opposing changes to net neutrality legislation stateside, the European Parliament has voted against such changes from happening here in the UK.

The principle of net neutrality, and the law that enforces it, is that all internet traffic should be considered completely equal regardless of where it comes from. Without it, US cable providers would be free to charge individual organisations, such as, for instance, Netflix, a premium in order to receive preferential treatment on the network, to ensure customers receive an uninterrupted service even at peak times.

Supporters of this so-called "paid priority" believe that if they are willing to pay more for a service, they should be able to receive that service faster and more reliably as a consequence. Sceptics, however, are quick to point out the unfairness in such a proposition.

We can look at it from both a consumer and a business perspective, although really the difference between the two is minimal. Consumers who simply can't afford to pay a premium shouldn't be forced to experience a drop in the quality of their service.

It's much the same for businesses who are paying for online or cloud services. Businesses shouldn't have to accept a substandard level of service simply because larger organisations can afford to pay their service providers more for preferential treatment. Neither should they be forced into the position of passing the costs of premiums services onto their customer case just to stay competitive.  And up it goes through the chain, to CSPs who will have to make the choice between providing their customers with standard (potentially reduced speed) connectivity or paying more for super-speed, super-reliable, super-everything connectivity.

We work a lot with third sector organisations, and these concerns are especially relevant to them. Charities and NGOs have notoriously tight budgets, with very little room for manoeuvre. Upping the cost of their services, or threatening the quality or reliability of their systems, could be genuinely catastrophic for them.

Providing a fast, reliable and cost-effective service is what we strive for as a company every day. Anything that has the potential to compromise that service for our customers is a big risk, and one we're not willing to take. While it would be great to offer even faster and more reliable connectivity to organisations that can afford it, the EU is generally in agreement that it is wholly unfair to penalise those that cannot.

Meanwhile, over the pond in the US, consumers and businesses alike are calling for answers. The FCC promise that the proposed changes will make no difference to regular internet speeds but will merely introduce a higher tier of internet that will sit above it. In reality though, when you're giving priority to certain providers on a network, the others are bound to suffer. That's why we have congestion in the first place – the network just isn't wide enough to give everyone equal speeds at peak times. So when someone is prepared to pay more for priority, the quality of service for others is going to be affected.

The FCC is accepting comments on the proposal until July 15th.

Save