By: Erin Stanley
Net neutrality is a fundamental principle ensuring that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) treat all Internet traffic equally. In 2015, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) passed a sweeping order preventing ISPs from blocking, selectively speeding up, slowing down, or prioritizing internet traffic. Just two years later, in 2017, the policy was repealed. However, it has once again become a focal point of U.S. regulatory policy. In 2024, the FCC reinstated strict net neutrality rules marking a significant return to the initially established regulations in 2015.
RealtyCom aims to educate our clients about net neutrality. However, it takes time to have a significant impact on the types of services and marketing agreements which we advise our clients on. To understand its impact, let’s revisit the arguments for and against net neutrality:
| For Net Neutrality: Key Arguments | Against Net Neutrality: Key Arguments |
| Preservation of Open Internet, Promotion of Innovation and Competition: Proponents argue that net neutrality is crucial for maintaining an open and fair Internet, where all online content is treated equally. Without these regulations, ISPs could prioritize certain websites or services, leading to a tiered internet where wealthy corporations can pay for faster access, while smaller websites and startups suffer from latency. Today, you can access any website and download information at the same speed, regardless of which website it is. | Promotion of Investment and Innovation: Opponents argue that internet deregulation incentivizes investment and innovation in broadband infrastructure and services. They claim that allowing ISPs to prioritize certain types of Internet traffic or offer specialized services promotes investment in network upgrades and technological advances that benefit consumers. They claim less government regulation fosters a more competitive and dynamic marketplace while excessive regulation stifles innovation and investment by imposing compliance costs and bureaucratic hurdles on ISPs, potentially leading to higher prices for consumers. |
| Consumer Rights and Privacy: Advocates argue that net neutrality safeguards consumer rights and privacy. Without it, ISPs could engage in biased practices, such as selling user data to third parties or discriminating based on content type, infringing on privacy and consumer rights. | Market Flexibility and Differentiation: Critics assert that deregulation promotes market flexibility by enabling ISPs to tailor services to meet diverse consumer needs and preferences. By offering tiered pricing or specialized services, ISPs can compete more effectively and provide consumers with added options that suit their needs and budgets. |
| Protection of Free Speech and Expression: Net neutrality is seen as vital for protecting free speech and expression online. Without these rules, ISPs could potentially censor or throttle access to certain websites or viewpoints, undermining free speech and restricting the flow of information. | Protection of Quality of Service: Critics believe that deregulation allows ISPs to prioritize certain types of traffic, such as video streaming or online gaming, to maintain a higher quality of service. By managing network congestion and prioritizing critical applications, ISPs can deliver consistent and reliable internet speeds, avoiding degraded performance and providing better user experiences. |
The FCC’s repeal of Net Neutrality in the United States in December 2017 sparked a significant debate, with contrasting predictions about the future of the Internet. So, what has happened since the repeal?
What Has Happened Since the Repeal
Infrastructure Investment:
Mixed Results: It is difficult to attribute broadband investment solely to the policy change. Broader market trends and technological advancements, such as the emergence of 5G and desire for wireless connectivity have likely played more significant roles in fiber expansion and driving these investments. We see a strong focus on technological improvements to consumer premise equipment, further speed enhancements (2 Gigabit wired connections are becoming more common) and expansion to new areas via fiber overbuilds.
Innovation and Competition:
Incremental Changes: Although there continues to be innovation in this space, it is unclear whether it is because of or in spite of repeal.
Quality of Service:
No Major Shifts: There have been no significant improvements in service quality directly attributable to the repeal. Any improvements have generally been incremental following pre-existing trends.
Internet “Fast Lanes”:
Limited Implementation: Despite initial concerns, paid prioritization has not been widely implemented. However, some proposals have raised concerns about potential future developments in this direction.
Blocking and Throttling:
Isolated Incidents: While there have been a few instances of ISPs throttling or restricting access to certain services, these cases have been relatively isolated. High-profile incidents, such as Verizon throttling a fire department’s data during a wildfire response, have brought attention to these issues but are not widespread.
Costs for Consumers:
Stable Prices: Consumer broadband prices have generally remained stable.
The repeal of net neutrality has not led to the extreme outcomes predicted by either side. Investment and innovation have been moderate, and the dire predictions of rampant blocking, throttling, and price hikes have yet to occur on a wide scale.
RealtyCom is committed to continued education and will monitor service provider changes for the benefit of your communities and residents. If you want to read about other laws impacting the multifamily industry, see our more comprehensive article, Regulatory Compliance in Telecom – Understanding the Federal, State, and Local Laws Impacting Resident Choice at Your Property.
