The Federal Communications Commission of the United States rolling over on net neutrality might result in a huge blow to the content industry.
hp-a-fcc-net-neutrality.jpg

For a while now, the outfit was expected to stand up to the telcos and demand they to be more reasonable on the problem of a two-tiered Internet. The matter is that the telcos saw forcing the content industry to pay extra to use their cables more efficiently and thus make more money, though this could effectively damage the Internet structure. All attempts by the FCC to regulate net neutrality were declawed.

When the Federal Communications Commission announced that it was considering rules that would let the communication companies to charge major content businesses for better service, everyone began moaning that open communication died, the costs of access rose, and perhaps, most importantly, that they couldn’t access streaming episodes of favorite TV shows anymore.

In response, the comms companies claimed that demand for streaming content has already choked American networks, and they now had to spread the cost of upgraded service to such content providers as Netflix. In other words, that they had money to spend it on better connections. For some reason, they forget that they won’t have to spend any more money on improving networks due to increased profits from the heavy users of the tubes.

Nevertheless, the industry observers point at something more dangerous that can damage the content industry. For the last few years, the entertainment industry has been winning the battle against online piracy, which means that it is in most cases easier and cheaper for people to buy and stream content than to risk lawsuits with the industry. However, now the telcos have made that streaming product less attractive by increasing price. As a result, people might turn back to the peer-to-peer websites and piracy to get their favorite TV programs.

The question is whether the Internet has become a human right, or a business to be controlled by the telecommunication companies. Some argue that the American government should treat the worldwide web as a public utility.

However, in the United States, several Internet service providers control the bulk of the market – moreover, in some areas there is no choice with only one ISP available. In such circumstances, there is no advantage in being served by market forces, simply because there is aren’t any.