What The End of Net Neutrality Could Mean For You

The FCC has passed a proposal that opens the debate concerning the future of the Internet. The proposal will be debated in Congress and elsewhere, and calls for preserving open access to the Internet by banning the largest broadband providers, like AT&T, Comcast, Verizon and others, from blocking any websites.

It also opens the door for these providers to cut deals with content providers, such as Amazon and Netflix, to have preferential treatment by creating a certain type of fast lane for their customers.
While the largest content providers would realize a competitive advantage for this fast lane access, it would potentially harm those lacking the resources to jump on this Internet super highway.

Their content would move at a slower pace and, in theory, make their product less desirable. This would also end what is called "Net Neutrality", or free and equal access to the Internet, a concept that all Internet traffic should be treated equally by broadband providers.
Many argue that the end of Net Neutrality would create a sort of open season for large content companies to provide users with "fast" and "slow" Internet connections. They believe these companies would charge a premium for the faster service while somehow penalizing those who only want the less expensive slower service.

Some even believe the content providers would slow down their non-premium connection to the point where users would be forced to pay extra to maintain standard quality.

The most vocal opponents to this change in Internet access appear to be young people, entrepreneurs and consumer advocates, many with good reason.
Open access to the Internet has enabled many technology start-ups to gain traction with limited funding. It has helped young entrepreneurs and smaller companies level the playing field with other larger competitors as they position themselves for growth.
Creating different levels of broadband use could create an information dam between large enterprises and smaller companies, as many try to gain a foothold with new innovative ideas and products.
In question as well will be differentiating between large users and small users of broadband.

For example, will large retailers who send out vast amounts of data to consumers be charged at the same rate as say a financial firm who needs high speed access to conduct equity transactions? Still another group desires more change. They would like to overhaul the current system by reclassifying broadband as a utility like your telephone service or electric company. This would make the Internet subject to even more intensive government regulation.

Companies such as Google and Microsoft would probably use their vast resources to fight any potential change in access that would negatively impact their ability to provide services at current levels. Any potential new law or legislation could face legal scrutiny and be tied up in the courts for years.
Yet many of the largest content providers seem to have a plan for some type of change to the current system and are poised to pursue it. A change that may not be in the best interests of the average business owner or average consumer.