Net Neutrality In Canada Essay

In recent years net neutrality has become a hotly debated topic. Canadian consumers have favored legislation protecting net neutrality and Canadian telecoms have sought to change the legislation. In this case, Canadian consumers have it wrong. Canada should strike down its legislation regulating how internet service providers behave and move to a more open market. The current legislation forces all Canadian internet service providers to treat all traffic equally. This stifles competition and reduces consumer options.

Arguing in favor of net neutrality does seem sensible as net neutrality rules are designed to protect consumers and prevent internet service providers (ISP’s) from becoming media gatekeepers. Treating all internet traffic the

same seems to be an intuitive solution for maintaining an open and fair internet. Proponents of net neutrality argue that new companies would be unable to gain a foothold online as they would need to pay ISP’s substantial amounts of money for consumers to be able to view or access their products.
Many modern tech giants were once small, scrappy start-ups that were developed with limited capital and resources.

Protecting innovation is important and governments should be working to create an environment that fosters innovation. However, the current legislation in Canada goes past what is necessary and impedes its own function.

The United States only recently introduced net neutrality legislation. Prior to these regulations, the internet functioned in a healthy and fair manner. The rules put in place in 2015 by the Obama administration were attempting to fix a problem that didn’t exist. These rules have limited consumers options rather than protecting them. The FCC under the Obama administration used legislation from the 1930’s and the 1990’s to regulate modern telecom companies. These rules are outdated and ill fitted to regulating modern telecom companies.

The monopolistic nature of the internet service industry is often cited as a reason for net neutrality. Current internet technology tends to limit consumer options when choosing an ISP. To gain access to high speed internet services, consumers need to be directly connected to the ISP’s network through some variety of cable technology. This discourages ISP’s from building multiple overlapping networks and creates barriers for new entrants to the market. Building a network that can service a large group of consumers requires large amounts of capital and the incumbent service providers can lower their prices which makes

it even more difficult for new market entrants.
At a glance it seems reasonable to enforce net neutrality rules as consumers have limited ISPS options. In some cases, consumers only have one ISP they can choose from. This, in theory, would give an ISP a great deal of control over their customers, if they are left unregulated. However, companies operating in an monopoly still need to offer a product that consumers desire. Proponents of net neutrality often claim that internet service providers will force their customers to only use certain media services. If Internet service providers dilute the value of their product by forcing unwanted products upon their customers, then their customers will leave as new companies see a reason to enter the market.
Communication technology is also going through a great deal of change.

While high-speed internet access is currently limited to a physical connection, our wireless technology is rapidly progressing. Most consumers also have an internet connect via their cell phone. This limits an ISP’s ability to abuse their power and filter or censor content from consumers. All of the telecom companies would need to work together in order to successfully filter content and this would run afoul of consumer protections laws. The coming 5G networks will further dilute ISP’s monopoly as it will be much easier for companies to provide internet access to consumers. As preciously mentioned, the United States internet was left unregulated for years and there exists very little evidence that the companies attempted to filter content or censor consumers media

choices.
In fact, Facebook, Google and other large online technology companies have far more influence over what content we see online. These companies are not subject to net neutrality rules even though they wield much more influence over us than any internet service provider. Both Google and Facebook act as the gateway through which many people read news and access media.
The repeal of net neutrality regulations will have no effect upon long standing consumer protection and anti-competition rules. Companies will still need to adhere to rules which are designed to protect consumers. Price-fixing and other anti-competitive practices will remain illegal.
Many Canadian consumers are unhappy with the prices they pay for internet access. Enforcing legislation that maintains the status-quo will not lead to happier customers. New options should be explored, and the removal of net neutrality legislation will lead to an increase in product offerings. The removal of net neutrality will lead to an increase in new products that will be able to satisfy a wide variety of consumer demands.
Net neutrality legislation was introduced to protect consumers, but it has limited consumer options. Canadian consumers are frustrated with their internet service providers and there is little evidence that demonstrates net neutrality as useful or necessary. Canada should work towards striking down its current legislation that protects net neutrality and move to a more open market.