We all like fast internet, we all love to watch movies on netflix in HD. However we should all be adamantly against the current crop of people fighting for so called net neutrality. Why? The fight for the net as it is being called is being vastly misrepresented by people at all levels. The telecom industry would have you believe they are completely against being labeled as Title II common carriers. However nothing could be further from the truth.
What is Title II anyway? It is a section of the 1934 and 1996 telecommunications acts that designates that specific types of communications must be treated as necessary utilities like electricity, gas, or water. What does this mean for you and me? Basically it means that which ever company happens to own the grid they are required to allow other companies to use their grid to compete against whom ever happens to own the grid. Naturally the competitor must pay a carriage fee to use the network. Well that doesn't sound so bad does it? Creates competition, lowers costs for companies looking to get into the markets. Win win right?
If that was all the title II regulations would do it would be a simple decision. However there are many more regulations that will come into play if the telecom companies are put into title II status. Namely, unlawful content. What is unlawful content you ask? Don't we already have laws that prohibit child porn and other things. Yes we do however, subtle word changes make all the difference. Let's define illegal, contrary to or forbidden by law, especially criminal law. Let's define unlawful, not conforming to, permitted by, or recognized by law or rules. Those look similar right? They are in fact exact opposites. One is something that is clearly prohibited by law, the other is something that is clearly not allowed under the law.
Jaywalking is a good example of this, in many places it is unlawful but not illegal. There is no law that says you can not jaywalk however there are also no laws that say you can jaywalk. So how is that treated in a system of unlawful monitoring? The answer is, while you are not breaking any law you will still get in trouble because it wasn't expressly permitted. This is the problem with the current tone of the net neutrality debate. Everyone is clamoring for net neutrality because they do not want to have to wait 10 seconds for their netflix to buffer. However most are completely oblivious to anything else that would happen if those fighting for net neutrality get what they think they want.
No one seems to care that they will be giving control of how to police the internet to the ISPs. For example you have a blog, you happen to make joke in a blog post that someone finds offensive to some group. They call up their ISP and your blog is shut down, your IP address is blocked, and you are SOL because you made an unlawful comment, aka "bullying or hate speech". This is where the internet is heading under the proposed net neutrality rules. All because we are a bunch of spoiled douchebags who complain when we have to wait a few seconds for netflix to buffer.