[GA] Internet Neutrality Act [Complete]

Sil Dorsett

The Belt Collector
-
-
Deputy Speaker
-
-
-
-
TNP Nation
sil_dorsett
Discord
sildorsett
Category: Social Justice
Strength: Mild
Proposed by: Draconae
Onsite Topic

The General Assembly,

ACKNOWLEDGING that the Internet is a means of communication, collaboration, expression, and business for many;

BELIEVING that access to all lawful content on the Internet is fundamental to both freedom of expression and the growth of small businesses;

DISTURBED that WA nations or Internet Service Providers could arbitrarily restrict access to lawful content or the Internet itself;

HEREBY:

DEFINES

“Internet” as a system of interconnected networks of digital devices used to transfer data between said devices and their networks,

“Internet Service Provider” as an entity that provides the ability to access the Internet to businesses, residents, or other customers such as shops, schools, or libraries, excluding entities who only offer the ability to access the Internet as an additional benefit and not as a primary source of Internet access,

“Bandwidth throttling” as the intentional act of decreasing the speed of a connection below the maximum possible connection speed,

PROHIBITS WA Nations from blocking access to or bandwidth throttling the Internet or specific lawful content, directly or indirectly, including content that is critical of the government or of other government interests,

PROHIBITS Internet Service Providers from blocking access to or bandwidth throttling the Internet or specific lawful content, unless allowed by Clause Four,

ALLOWS blocking access or bandwidth throttling by Internet Service Providers to

Allow all digital devices to receive access to the Internet,

Allow all digital devices access to necessary services in extreme situations, such as natural disasters, or

As a result of a published scale of prices for connection speeds and data caps disclosed to all customers of the Internet Service Provider.

Voting Instructions:
  • Vote For if you want the Delegate to vote For the resolution.
  • Vote Against if you want the Delegate to vote Against the resolution.
  • Vote Abstain if you want the Delegate to abstain from voting on this resolution.
  • Vote Present if you are personally abstaining from this vote.

Detailed opinions with your vote are appreciated and encouraged!

[wavote=the_north_pacific,ga]2017_04_03_internet_neutrality_act[/wavote]
[wavote=world,ga]2017_04_03_internet_neutrality_act[/wavote]
 
The Internet Neutrality Act fails to correctly implement the concept of net neutrality. While the resolution addresses the explicit throttling down of connection speed to specific content, it does not address the prioritization of content, leaving open the possibility of large corporations paying a bribe for more favorable traffic prioritization. Additionally, while the resolution prohibits WA Nations and ISPs residing in them to not block lawful content, it still leaves the definition of lawful content up to individual states, making that part of the resolution meaningless.

For these reasons, the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote against this resolution.
 
Why exactly are you voting against this resolution? I realise that for ABC, that may have to do with the fact that their currently drafted resolution would become illegal for duplication, but writ large, I cannot see any major flaws with the resolution as currently proposed.
 
Imperium Anglorum:
I cannot see any major flaws with the resolution as currently proposed.
I certainly do.

1) The definition of "Internet" is too broad, including computer networks other than the public Internet. For example, there's no reason why a network neutrality mandate should apply to networks reserved for use by a single telecom provider for the purposes of providing IP-based services such as IPTV.

2) The definition of "bandwidth throttling" is vague. There are multiple candidates for the "maximum possible connection speed" for a particular link, and it's not really clear which one this resolution is referring to. Is it the last mile link speed, which is usually what is advertised to customers? Is it the total bandwidth of the core routers divided by the number of subscribers? Is it the lowest-bandwidth link for any particular customer for any particular connection? This definition significantly affects the mandates of the resolution. Is oversubscribing the last mile "throttling" and therefore prohibited? Is prioritization of certain applications "throttling" and therefore prohibited? Who knows -- the resolution doesn't clarify!

3) The prohibition on member states blocking content is meaningless, since it only applies to "lawful content". Member states can simply declare any content they wish to block illegal. Existing World Assembly resolutions do a far better job of protecting free speech than this one.

4) The prohibition on blocking content is absolute and does not permit ISPs to block content on behalf of their customers, which can be useful in certain contexts. For example, a school or library may want ISPs to block access to pornography on their connection; this resolution would prevent them from doing so.

5) The prohibition on throttling connections includes certain exceptions, but not enough to cover all forms of reasonable network management. For example, the resolution does not seem to permit ISPs to throttle high consumption users when the network is congested in order to improve performance for others; they would only be permitted to do so once the network is no longer accessible for certain users. In addition, the resolution does not seem to permit prioritization of certain kinds of traffic that requires lower latency over other traffic that can tolerate higher latency, such as video streaming vs. peer-to-peer file sharing.
 
The great nations of Heritage Quay add her vote:
Against

The delegate for [nation=short]Auralia[/nation] has done a wonderful job capturing our own objections to this resolution.
 
I vote 'For' this resolution.

The people of Northern Gala respect the civil rights of themselves and those around them more than anything. As a representative for my people, it is my duty to endorse this resolution.
 
Voting on this resolution has ended.

Thanks to those nations who cast their votes. Your participation is a great help to the region.

This topic has been locked and sent to the Archives for safekeeping. If you would like this topic to be re-opened for further discussion, please contact the WA Delegate, a Global Moderator, or an Administrator for assistance. Thank you.
 
Back
Top