Why Net Neutrality Needs to Happen

Friday, March 17, 2017

Annotated Bibliography

Bourreau, M., Kourandi, F., & Valletti, T. (2015). Net neutrality with competing internet
platforms. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 63(1), 73.

This article published in 2015 examines the connection between ISPs charging its
customers more money for higher bandwidth under a discriminatory regime. The
findings revealed that a discriminatory regime would be more beneficial to the profits and
expansion potential for ISPs, but bring about sabotage among ISPs.
Although I have taken a class in statistical quality control, I did not find the
source to be as useful as I thought it could be due to the prevalence of statistical formulas
and graphs which, while extremely informative, do not appeal to those that lack
knowledge in advanced statistics. The source does take an analytical approach with
qualitative data to provide additional information however.
Overall, I felt the source was effective in describing the particular outcome of an
internet economy with less restrictions for telecom companies. However, this is the
opposing argument to net neutrality and lacks other factors that the other sources
contradict.

Gaivoronski, A. A., Nesse, P., sterbo, O., & Lnsethagen, H. (2016). Risk-balanced
dimensioning and pricing of end-to-end differentiated services. European Journal of
Operational Research, 254(2), 644-655. doi://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2016.04.019

Lower-tier ISPs facing the prospect of expanding the physical network for end of
service data transfer may benefit from tiering bandwidth data rates, according to the
article.
The article is much clearer in its intent and display of information than the
previous one, and although the model presented is highlighting the benefits that the
corporations would receive, the points made are concise.
Once again, this source will be used for rebuttal as well as to describe the
arguments of those in favor of net neutrality.

Gans, J. S. (2014). Weak versus strong net neutrality. Journal of Regulatory Economics, 47(2),
183-200. doi:10.1007/s11149-014-9266-7

Of the articles detailed to this point, Gans' takes a more favorable approach
towards net neutrality and proposes a model that invokes a direct relationship between
content consumers and content providers, cutting out the ISP as the middleman.
 Why Net Neutrality Needs to Happen
Friday, March 17, 2017
I think the content in this paper provides a striking and needed contrast to the
other sources involved, as many of them view the net neutrality debate from the
perspective of the ISPs; this article views the debate from the perspective of regular
internet customers.

This source will be extremely beneficial to my argument, as more statistical

evidence as well as qualitative evidence is provided that will support my position.

Narechania, T. N., & Wu, T. (2014). Sender side transmission rules for the internet. Federal
Communications Law Journal, 66(3), 467.

Narechania and Wu's paper divulges into practical tweaks to existing telecom
laws that can be modified to prevent erosion of net neutrality.
This paper justifies the changes needed by using legal jargon and referring to
specific federal codes, some old, that govern the framework of basic communication in
the US.
As this paper takes a stance in favor of net neutrality, it will greatly help
strengthen my argument.

Peitz, M., & Schuett, F. (2016). Net neutrality and inflation of traffic. International Journal of
Industrial Organization, 46, 16-62. doi://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijindorg.2016.03.003

Different strengths of net neutrality regulation under a lone ISP with total market
control are considered. The authors find that heavy net neutrality leads to inefficiencies in
data delivery.
This is another statistical-based research article, so much of the information that
was present was difficult for me to decipher.
As strict net neutrality would be tough to implement, I believe the source will
help in demonstrating the rational reasons why too much control can be
counterproductive.

Speta, J. B. (2014) Unintentional antitrust: The FCC's only (and better) way forward with net
neutrality after the mess of Verizon v. FCC. 66, 491+.

Speta's arguments in support of net neutrality are important because they target an
aspect of the debate that isn't discussed much, which is why are there ISP monopolies in
certain markets in the first place?

The article takes the stance while reflecting on past legislation and court decisions
in the FCC's favor.
 Why Net Neutrality Needs to Happen
Friday, March 17, 2017
Because of the way that Speta presents the arguments, they will help introduce
another positive aspect of net neutrality into my argument.

Tate, D. T. (2014). Net neutrality 10 years later: A still unconvinced commissioner. Federal
Communications Law Journal. 66, 509+.

According to this article, innovation, competition, and overall access to the

internet is threatened by the policies of net neutrality, because small businesses,
especially those owned by women and minorities, would be at risk of failure.
Because Commissioner Tate is a Republican, there is an inherent bias in
opposition to net neutrality. The article also takes many of the arguments of the ISPs and
presents them in a way that portrays economic hardship on average consumers under net
neutrality.
Although this is an opposition article, I plan to use it to refute certain points in my
research argument.

Wright, C. J. (2014). The scope of the FCC's ancillary jurisdiction after the D.C. circuit's net
neutrality decisions. 67, 19+.