First Draft

 In December 2017, the United States abolished the principles of net neutrality, raising controversy. It's been two years since the Obama administration set up a net neutrality principle. The Trump administration has also explained the reasons for the abolition of net neutrality : ' The next five members of the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) have been trying to ease the regulation on ISPs, which will drive up competition for next-generation communications infrastructure. ' We'll have to wait and see, as the U.S. government says, whether it will positively affect the next generation of communications development and investment, or, as IT companies and consumers say, the competition and consumers will see. Abolishing net neutrality regulation limits the diversity of contents.

 

 The Federal Emergency Communication Commission on 14, December ruled that Internet service providers would not impose a higher quality service or a flat rate referendum on the provision of special favors to particular websites, but would impose the equivalent of all Obama content. Many consumer advocates have argued that if the rules are abolished, broadband providers will start selling the Internet collectively, in contrast to the way cable television is sold today. If people want to connect to Facebook and Twitter, according to the system, accessing such sites may require the cost of an advanced social media package. Consumers could be hurt by the paid transactions made to the games. Without rules preventing paid priorities, the fast lane could be occupied by the big Internet, media companies and wealthy families, and everyone else would be left in the slow lane. Some small business owners have also said they are concerned that the conglomerates could pay money to gain competitiveness and leave it in an unfair field of competition. Several Internet providers have made pledges not to block or restrict sites if the law is repealed in recent months. The companies argue that Title II gives F.C.C too much control over their business, and that the restriction makes it difficult to expand their network.

 Net neutrality is the concept that Internet Service Providers (ISP) should not look at content and applications on their Internet networks. The Principles of Network Discrimination or Non-discrimination is a concept suggested by Professor Tim Wu under the 'A Proposal for Network Neutrality'. In a Constitutional Court case under Article 53 of the Telecommunications Business Act, in which prisoners of the Constitution govern Internet violation, the Internet is a market that is " most participatory " and " expressive " media.It is characterized as As we enter the era of the Internet, the distinction between individual freedom of expression and freedom of expression through the media is disappearing. Indeed, the existence of the current net neutrality controversy may in itself be indicative of the passing of the era when free market of ideology was maintained by competition among Internet Service Providers (ISPs). That is, it may be that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has determined that Internet freedom can not function solely as a market function, so further intervention is required. And other federal agencies are also considering a rational regulatory framework for net neutrality.

 

 From the standpoint of the communication service, customers who have to spend more time and effort feel that they become " mainstream. " In other words, the highway has been set free to allow the use of smaller cars and larger trucks with the same rates. Even large trucks have ' mostly ' taken up the section on the highway.

Naver revealed on Tuesday that it paid 73.4 billion won for network use in 2016 alone. At the same time, Google asked how much it was paying. Naver's traffic usage was around 5,000 terabytes as of September. Google's traffic use is 30,000 terabytes for the same period. In short, it will cost about 440 billion won (44.0 million dollars) per year for network use. There is controversy over whether these incidents are reverse discrimination in the domestic Internet service sector. YouTube, the world's largest video streaming platform, saw its domestic share soar from 2 percent in December 2008 to 74 percent in August 2013. Meanwhile, the share of Pandora TV, a local company, plummeted from 42 percent to 4 percent during the same period. While local video service companies have to pay huge fees for their networks, the overseas platform, YouTube, costs little. In the wake of the massive earthquake in 2011, there were many complaints that underwater cables were damaged and YouTube slowed down. The reason for the change is that Internet operators, or carriers, have provided temporary storage, cache servers, at no cost to YouTube. Given this, the reaction of local content providers, called reverse discrimination, is also acceptable.

 Because of the low speed and the same rate you have to pay for when the Internet starts. Various algorithms are developed and used to reduce data and write less. As technology advances, Internet networks are installed, data transfers are faster, and fixed. That part of the burden has been eased. But when the wireless Internet is activated again, There is a need to reduce, compress and send more data, and the associated technologies are used a lot. Because technologies are developed, speed is faster as 2G, 3G, and 4G are coming, and there is little need for such method as a flat rate system. What about the YouTube we're watching now? Recently, the demand for 4K images has been increasing.

 People have a desire to see cleaner, clearer and bigger images. In addition, the U.S. decision to abolish net neutrality implies that Korea will inevitably end up with network neutrality. It may be when, but because our country's democracy and capitalism are based on the United States, they follow American forms. The nation is also highly likely to be abandoned. Even if it's not really over whether it's over or not. What if, indeed, the flat rate system were to be scrapped in our country? Once again, there will be a growing demand for technology to compress data. If the above startups were listed, their stocks would have gone up tremendously. Because compression technology has emerged as important again. Of course, these contents may once again sink under a new paradigm and sink below the surface of the water. And if that happens, telecommunications companies will be treated at the same level as Samsung and Samsung are now fighting. The fact that Google and Facebook are determined to use their energy and distribute the Internet through satellites or drones is also what they want to see on this paradigm, and Tesla's space X is also an extension of Elon Musk's dream.

 

 Those in favor of eliminating net neutrality say that in general terms, effective network operations and network investment can be hampered. They say securing investment incentives is crucial given the national economic impact of network sophistication on network investment factors. In terms of fair competition, they say competition among network operators and the emergence of various alternative networks can resolve a significant portion. And in terms of user choice, they say that it is important to have a choice of differentiated services.

 However, if net neutrality is abolished, it is important for communication operators to handle neutral traffic for innovation and user benefit. When it allows differentiation of transmission, investments are focused only on premium facilities that are advantageous in terms of profitability. Depending on interests, there is a chance that Samsung Electronics will be more discriminatory than competitions in process such as blocking or delaying certain traffic. And the user's right to freely select the content and services he or she wants is not guaranteed.

 

 Free access to the network is an essential element for Korea in the fourth industrial era. We pay for watching TV. There is no extra charge for what other shows you watch. By nature, it is up to the content company's ability to create a program that raises the ratings. If you have to pay more for a particular show, the new program could be difficult to even broadcast on TV in addition to the existing popular show. Problems related to the abolition of net neutrality can not be settled easily. There is a problem that could weaken the competitiveness of local content providers. It is not simply a competition between domestic businesses, but a situation in which businesses should be conducted around the world. If the principle of net neutrality is abolished when there is no proper response to the change in the business environment itself, Korean content businesses, which are suffering a huge amount of disruptions, will not be able to differentiate themselves from their competitiveness. I think this is the time when carriers need a justification to appeal to the cost side about providing stable service as traffic grows. It is worrisome that the abolition of net neutrality will damage the Internet environment, which has been growing due to the equality and interoperability of participants through horizontal openness. It is feared that we, who have gained knowledge by consuming various contents to gather information, will create a new internet class, such as the caste system.

Source : Collins, Keith. “Why Net Neutrality Was Repealed and How It Affects You.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 14 Dec. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/12/14/technology/net-neutrality-rules.html./

Kang, Cecilia. “Washington Governor Signs First State Net Neutrality Bill.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 6 Mar. 2018, www.nytimes.com/2018/03/05/business/net-neutrality-washington-state.html. / The United States FCC's abolition of the network-sensitive principle : the battle of network-content providers in the rapidly changing Internet environment, Newspaper and Broadcast