Debunking the “Net Neutrality Will Quash Innovation” Argument

Let's dispel some myths about net neutrality.

It is fascinating to hear Ivan Seidenberg and others argue vociferously that an open, fair, and transparent Internet will somehow quash innovation, when the opposite is true. It is time to debunk this argument. Without net neutrality, the Internet risks becoming a black box within which service providers can do whatever they please to traffic without oversight or public accountability. This is the surest way we know not only to quash innovation, but to break the Internet.

As we have said many times, the Internet is a complex and delicate ecosystem with many constituents, all of whom rely on each other for the system to work well. It is completely understandable that service providers and vendors want to make money from controlling what users can and cannot do over the Internet. But if they are allowed to do it by unfairly restricting or hobbling Internet activity, not only do they douse innovation in applications that traverse the Internet, they risk so upsetting the ecosystem balance that they break the Internet, hurting everyone's interests including their own. 

Think of it this way. The Environmental Protection Agency safeguards the public's interest by preventing and correcting abuse of our natural environment to keep it - and us - healthy. In the same way, the FCC is attempting to protect the Internet environment from those who, by pushing their own economic agenda too hard, can damage the Internet ecosystem. We've already encountered examples of this, such as the application of an "Internet pesticide" to some peer-to-peer applications. If the FCC cannot protect the public's interest, who will? This does not mean that service providers should not be allowed to manage traffic on their networks to ensure good and fair service performance. Net neutrality regulations as currently crafted do not diminish a service provider's ability to manage traffic fairly nor to charge for usage - as long as it's done fairly.

We think that all sides can agree that fairness, openness and transparency are in the public interest - and healthy for capitalism to boot. If the FCC does not advocate for the user, we certainly don't think that anyone else will. This is the right way to go for all concerned, Ivan Seidenberg and his employer included.

• net neutrality