'End of the Internet as we know it' is near: US law striking down net neutrality to come into force

Here are four important questions on net neutrality, and how the FCC ruling will impact it, answered.

What is net neutrality?

Net neutrality is a concept that says that internet service providers (ISPs) will treat all data fairly and equally. Put simply, the principle of net neutrality governs that ISPs should not be allowed to slow down data transfer from or to specific websites or services, in order to favour another.

"At the core, [net neutrality] means all data and content on the internet must be given equal rights, whether you're a college student in a dorm room or a mega-conglomerate that uses up a lot of the web's speed for, say, streaming movies and TV shows," wrote Samantha Murphy from Mashable in 2015.

To use an example, in the absence of net neutrality, a top e-commerce retailer could theoretically pay the leading ISPs to load its website faster than a smaller rival.

Advocates of net neutrality say large Internet-based businesses could thus use their money power to wipe out smaller players.

They add that in the absence of net neutrality, ISPs can block certain websites, form different lanes such as a fast lane or a slow lane for websites or charge varying amount of money from different websites in proportion to their audience reach etc.

In 2015, following an outrage sparked in part by a video by comedian John Oliver, the Obama administration passed an order stating that the principles of net neutrality be upheld.

What else do backers of net neutrality say?

Advocates say absence of net neutrality will make it harder for startups and younger companies to compete with existing corporations that can afford to cover the costs for preferential treatment from ISPs. Larger companies with deep-pockets could simply put brakes on innovation on the Internet by choking smaller players.

ISPs will effectively become the gatekeepers of content, determining what users should consume, rather than leaving the option with consumers. For some, this is akin to turning a democratic society into a dictator-run society.

Thirdly, since large Internet companies may end up paying more to ISPs, they will simply decide to pass on the costs to users, making content even more expensive.

What do those opposed to net neutrality say?

Large ISPs in the US such as Verizon or Comcast have appealed to the court in order to strike down the net neutrality rules, arguing that the FCC does not have the authority to require ISPs to treat traffic equally, an argument that was upheld by court. The court ruled in favour of the ISPs saying the FCC had overstepped its bounds and should redraft the rules.

According to the ISPs, having a faster lane would provide data-heavy content providers such as Netflix or a Hulu a faster lane, a move that they say will help consumers by declogging the internet.

The ISPs also claim that large companies paying for faster lane companies will help them generate more revenues, something that can be funnelled in into making further investments into the sector. They complain that low revenues have resulted in companies not being able to invest, which affects quality of service.

What do Indians feel about net neutrality? What is the stand of Indian authorities?

India isn’t alien to the subject of net neutrality. In 2015, Facebook launched a service called Free Basics (later renamed to Internet.org) aimed at providing free Internet services to those who could not afford data costs.

But the move ran into opposition with stand-up comedy group All India Bakchod, coming out with three videos discussing the subject of net neutrality, and specifically targetting the Facebook initiative.

The video went viral, with the resultant outpouring, forcing the TRAI to act -- the telecom regulator banned the service.