scholarly journals Net Neutrality, Business Models, and Internet Interconnection

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 104-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jay Pil Choi ◽  
Doh-Shin Jeon ◽  
Byung-Cheol Kim
Keyword(s):  
Price Discrimination ◽  
Business Models ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Neutral Network ◽  
Net Neutrality ◽  
Internet Service Providers ◽  
Internet Service ◽  
Market Framework ◽  
Second Degree

We analyze the effect of net neutrality regulation in a two-sided market framework when content is heterogeneous in its sensitivity to delivery quality. We characterize the equilibrium in a neutral network constrained to offer the same quality vis-à-vis a nonneutral network where Internet service providers are allowed to engage in second-degree price discrimination with a menu of quality-price pairs. We find that the merit of net neutrality regulation depends crucially on content providers' business models. More generally, our analysis can be considered a contribution to the literature on second-degree price discrimination in two-sided platform markets. (JEL D42, D43, D85, L51, L86, L88)

Internet Neutrality

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Löblich
Keyword(s):  
High Speed ◽  
Business Models ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Communication Studies ◽  
Net Neutrality ◽  
Internet Service Providers ◽  
Internet Service ◽  
Internet Neutrality

Internet neutrality—usually net(work) neutrality—encompasses the idea that all data packets that circulate on the Internet should be treated equally, without discriminating between users, types of content, platforms, sites, applications, equipment, or modes of communication. The debate about this normative principle revolves around the Internet as a set of distribution channels and how and by whom these channels can be used to control communication. The controversy was spurred by advancements in technology, the increased usage of bandwidth-intensive services, and changing economic interests of Internet service providers. Internet service providers are not only important technical but also central economic actors in the management of the Internet’s architecture. They seek to increase revenue, to recover sizable infrastructure upgrades, and expand their business model. This has consequences for the net neutrality principle, for individual users and corporate content providers. In the case of Internet service providers becoming content providers themselves, net neutrality proponents fear that providers may exclude competitor content, distribute it poorly and more slowly, and require competitors to pay for using high-speed networks. Net neutrality is not only a debate on infrastructure business models that is carried out in economic expert circles. On the contrary, and despite its technical character, it has become an issue in the public debate and an issue that is framed not only in economic but also in political and social terms. The main dividing line in the debate is whether net neutrality regulation is necessary or not and what scope net neutrality obligations should have. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in the United States passed new net neutrality rules in 2015 and strengthened its legal underpinning regarding the regulation of Internet service providers (ISPs). With the Telecoms Single Market Regulation, for the first time there will be a European Union–wide legislation for net neutrality, but not recent dilution of requirements. From a communication studies perspective, Internet neutrality is an issue because it relates to a number of topics addressed in communication research, including communication rights, diversity of media ownership, media distribution, user control, and consumer protection. The connection between legal and economic bodies of research, dominating net neutrality literature, and communication studies is largely underexplored. The study of net neutrality would benefit from such a linkage.

A netsemlegesség - definíciók, törvényhozói, tartalomszolgáltatói, internetszolgáltatói és felhasználói olvasatok

2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 41
Author(s):  
Zoltán Szűts ◽  
Jinil Yoo
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Social Communication ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Net Neutrality ◽  
Internet Service Providers ◽  
Internet Service ◽  
Free Competition ◽  
Theoretical Insight

Tanulmányunk témája a netsemlegesség. Először magát a fogalmat definiáljuk többféle módon, majd a netsemlegességgel kapcsolatos törvényhozói, internet- és tartalomszolgáltatói, valamint felhasználói kihívásokat, problémákat és válaszokat mutatjuk be. Számos szerző szerint az internet legnagyobb, immár tradicionális értéke a nyíltság, sokszínűség, tartalomgazdagság, tértől és időtől független társadalmi és perszonális kommunikációba való szabad belépés és a szabad verseny lehetősége. A netsemlegesség mellett és ellen felhozott érvek bemutatását is ezek a szempontok alapján tesszük. Kiemelt szerepet kap a netsemlegesség megsértésének kategorizálása is. Tanulmányunkban közlünk egy törvényalkotási kronológiát, mely az USA-ra, az EU-ra és Kelet-Ázsiára fókuszál, illetve ismertetjük a BEREC 2011-es felmérésének az EU-ban alkalmazott, internetszolgáltatói gyakorlatra vonatkozó eredményeit. A munkát az Internet.org kezdeményezést vizsgáló esettanulmány zárja, végül ezt követik a jövővel kapcsolatos kérdések, és néhány lehetséges válasz. --- Net neutrality - definitions and the standpoints of legislators, content providers, Internet service providers and users This article examines the topic of net neutrality. Firstly, it provides us with a theoretical insight and several definitions. Then it presents the issues and challenges legislators, ISP’s, content providers and users face. Several authors state that the biggest virtue and value of Internet lies in open access, diversity, richness of content, free competition, and low barrier entry for users in order to participate in personal social communication. Our presentation of arguments pro and cons net neutrality will be built on the basis of these considerations. Priority will be given to the introduction of several categories of net neutrality violations. In our paper we will present a legislative chronology in the topic focusing on USA, EU and Korea-Japan as well as the findings of the 2011 BEREC survey. Finally we examine the Internet.org project. In the conclusion, the article offers several more issues to be discussed and provides some possible answers.

STRATEGIC INTERACTION OF PROVIDERS FOR DIFFERENTIATED INTERNET SERVICES

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 102-113
Author(s):  
Alexey Gaivoronski ◽  
◽  
Vasily Gorbachuk ◽  
Maxim Dunaievskiy ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Service Providers ◽  
Network Capacity ◽  
Global Network ◽  
High Price ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Internet Services ◽  
Net Neutrality ◽  
Internet Service Providers ◽  
Video Content ◽  
Internet Service

As computing and Internet connections become general-purpose technologies and services aimed at broad global markets, questions arise about the effectiveness of such markets in terms of public welfare, the participation of differentiated service providers and end-users. Motorola’s Iridium Global Communications project was completed in the 1990s due to similar issues, reaching the goal of technological connectivity for the first time. As Internet services are characterized by high innovation, differentiation and dynamism, they can use well-known models of differentiated products. However, the demand functions in such models are hyperbolic rather than linear. In addition, such models are stochastic and include providers with different ways of competing. In the Internet ecosystem, the links between Internet service providers (ISPs) as telecommunications operators and content service providers are important, especially high-bandwidth video content providers. As increasing bandwidth requires new investments in network capacity, both video content providers and ISPs need to be motivated to do so. In order to analyze the relationships between Internet service providers and content providers in the Internet ecosystem, computable models, based on the construction of payoff functions for all the participants in the ecosystem, are suggested. The introduction of paid content browsing will motivate Internet service providers to invest in increasing the capacity of the global network, which has a trend of exponential growth. At the same time, such a browsing will violate the principles of net neutrality, which provides grounds for the development of new tasks to minimize the violations of net neutrality and maximize the social welfare of the Internet ecosystem. The models point to the importance of the efficiency of Internet service providers, the predictability of demand and the high price elasticity of innovative services.

The Competition Between ISPs in Presence of the Net Neutrality

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 166
Author(s):  
Mohamed El Amrani ◽  
Hamid Garmani ◽  
Mohamed Baslam ◽  
Rachid El Ayachi
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Service ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Decision Support Tool ◽  
Neutral Network ◽  
Net Neutrality ◽  
Internet Service ◽  
Support Tool ◽  
Content Provider ◽  
The Impact

<p>In this work, we present an economic model of computer networks that describes the in-teraction between Internet Service Providers (ISP ), customers and content provider. The competition between ISP s may be translated by the prices they require and the qualities of service (QoS) they offer. The customer demand for service from an ISP does not only de-pend on the price and quality of service (QoS) of the ISP , but it is influenced by all those offered by its competitors. This behavior has been extensively analyzed using game the-ory as a decision support tool. We interpret a non-neutral network when a content provider privileges ISP s by offering them more bandwidth to ensure proper QoS to support ap-plications that require more data transport capacity (voice over internet protocol (V OIP ) the live video streaming, online gaming). In addition, our work focuses on the price game analysis and QoS between ISP s in two cases: neutral network and non-neutral network. After showing the existence and uniqueness of equilibrium in terms of quality of service, we analyzed the impact of net neutrality on competition between ISP s. We also validated our theoretical study with numerical results, which show that the game has an equilibrium point which depends on all the parameters of the system.</p>

scholarly journals Net Neutrality: A Fast Lane to Understanding the Trade-offs

2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 127-150 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shane Greenstein ◽  
Martin Peitz ◽  
Tommaso Valletti
Keyword(s):  
Service Providers ◽  
Economic Consequences ◽  
Net Neutrality ◽  
Internet Service Providers ◽  
Pricing Model ◽  
Economic Literature ◽  
Internet Service ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Long Run ◽  
Definition Of

The last decade has seen a strident public debate about the principle of “net neutrality.” The economic literature has focused on two definitions of net neutrality. The most basic definition of net neutrality is to prohibit payments from content providers to internet service providers; this situation we refer to as a one-sided pricing model, in contrast with a two-sided pricing model in which such payments are permitted. Net neutrality may also be defined as prohibiting prioritization of traffic, with or without compensation. The research program then is to explore how a net neutrality rule would alter the distribution of rents and the efficiency of outcomes. After describing the features of the modern internet and introducing the key players, (internet service providers, content providers, and customers), we summarize insights from some models of the treatment of internet traffic, framing issues in terms of the positive economic factors at work. Our survey provides little support for the bold and simplistic claims of the most vociferous supporters and detractors of net neutrality. The economic consequences of such policies depend crucially on the precise policy choice and how it is implemented. The consequences further depend on how long-run economic trade-offs play out; for some of them, there is relevant experience in other industries to draw upon, but for others there is no experience and no consensus forecast.

scholarly journals Subsidizing Creativity through Network Design: Zero-Pricing and Net Neutrality

2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 61-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin S Lee ◽  
Tim Wu
Keyword(s):  
Service Providers ◽  
Net Neutrality ◽  
Internet Service Providers ◽  
Coordination Problem ◽  
Internet Service ◽  
Content Creation ◽  
Pricing Decisions ◽  
Patent Laws ◽  
Price Rule ◽  
Creativity And Innovation

This paper focuses on the pricing aspect of the “net neutrality” debate—in particular, the de facto ban on fees levied by Internet service providers on content providers to reach users. This “zero-price” rule may prove desirable for several reasons. Using a two-sided market analysis, we suggest that it subsidizes creativity and innovation in new content creation—goals shared by copyright and patent laws. The rule also helps to solve a coordination problem: since Internet service providers do not completely internalize the effects of their own pricing decisions, lack of regulation may lead to even higher fees charged by all. Finally, allowing for such fees runs the risk of creating horizontally differentiated Internet service providers with different libraries of accessible content, thereby foreclosing consumers and leading to Internet fragmentation.

An Agent-Based B2C Electronic Market in the Next-Generation Internet

2010 ◽  
pp. 227-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vedran Podobnik ◽  
Krunoslav Trzec ◽  
Gordan Jezic
Keyword(s):  
Business Models ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Internet Service Providers ◽  
Electronic Market ◽  
Internet Service ◽  
Agent Based ◽  
Next Generation Internet ◽  
Internet Users ◽  
Business To Consumer ◽  
New Consumer

In a global multi-service and multi-provider market, Internet Service Providers (ISPs) will increasingly need to base their operation on new consumer-centric business models. In this article, the authors present an agent-based framework for the Business-to-Consumer (B2C) electronic market, comprising User Agents, Broker Agents and Provider Agents, which enable Internet users to select an ISP in an automated manner.

The Net Neutrality Debate is Outdated: Time for a New Wider View

2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Victor Glass
Keyword(s):  
Service Providers ◽  
Information Services ◽  
Net Neutrality ◽  
Internet Service Providers ◽  
Light Touch ◽  
Internet Service ◽  
New Approach ◽  
Common Carrier ◽  
Election Results

AbstractIn 2008, former FCC Commissioner McDowell warned that Net Neutrality regulatory rulings could change every two to four years with election results His prediction was prescient. The democrat-led Wheeler Commission used technical definitions of telecommunication and information services to place all carriers under light touch Title II common carrier regulations. The succeeding republican-led Pai Commission rescinded the Wheeler Commission’s Order. The problem with both orders is that telecommunications and information services as separate categories are losing relevance in the online economy. A new approach to Net Neutrality policy is introduced that recognizes the emergence of large platforms and Internet service providers (ISPs) competing against each other. The recommendation is to break regulatory silos and develop a holistic oversight of the online ecosystem that examines in an integrated way anticompetitive behavior associated with communication, information, and services.

scholarly journals (Why) Did EU Net Neutrality Rules Overshoot the Mark? Internet, Disruptive Innovation and EU Competition Law & Policy

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (18) ◽  
pp. 227-239
Author(s):  
Oles Andriychuk
Keyword(s):  
Service Providers ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Disruptive Innovation ◽  
Net Neutrality ◽  
Internet Service Providers ◽  
Electronic Communications ◽  
Internet Service ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Disruptive Innovations ◽  
The Eu

This essay raises a number of theses in support for a more liberalised approach to EU Net Neutrality rules. It offers a graded system of levels of regulatory intervention, arguing that soft Net Neutrality rules are capable of meeting all positive objectives of regulation without causing the problems generated by hard Net Neutrality rules, such as those currently in place in the EU. Hard Net Neutrality rules prevent Internet Service Providers (ISPs) from making disruptive innovations. Meanwhile, they enable some Content and Application Providers (CAPs) to monopolise many markets via (disruptive) innovations, resulting in newly established dominant positions which have, in many instances, been abused. The hypothesis of the essay is that loosening the rules on Net Neutrality would create competition between ISPs and CAPs as well as (which is even more important) between different CAPs for limited premium speed traffic. Such newly established competition could remedy some antitrust conundrums faced by EU competition enforcers and sectorial regulators vis-à-vis disruptive innovators in the area of electronic communications.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document