What is net-neutrality?

It’s a principle that ISPs* should make access to all websites equal, not faster
or slower. Without them, ISPs could give grant or block access to certain websites on their own
terms. In United States, FCC**, under its chair Ajit Pai, reversed the Obama-era law of equal access
to websites by ISPs since June 11. However, incidents of abuses happen due to lack of regulation
have been reported, with examples being providers having no transparency on policies like hidden
charges, throttling internet speed, and blocking traffic .

In Indonesia, telecommunication giants Telkom Indonesia and Indosat triumph over other ISPs with
attractive data plans providing free accesses to certain applications (usually data-heavy services)
that are in partnership with them. This practice is called zero-rating, and it plays a major role to date
in Indonesia’s mobile operator market. Owning to the fact that there’s no conduct of net-neutrality
violation worse than zero-rating, such as extortion by upselling customers to higher-priced,
Indonesian ISPs collectively expressed that net-neutrality does not warrant a second glance.

So, let’s take a look at the implications of net-neutrality’s absence by scrutinizing a data plan offered
by Indosat, ‘Freedom Combo’ and hopefully convince you why we need it.

For as low as Rp65.000/mo., customers can access Facebook, Line, and Whatsapp for free, and enjoy
partial data exemption for streaming on Youtube—all of which are hubs of millennial entertainment
and communication. In this way, these applications gain an advantage over other social media or
Over-The-Top Services because the mobile operator is essentially providing them for free whereas
users of competitors’ apps had to pay for the data required to use the service. The harms that could
rise from this relate to potential unfair competition in, and inhibition, of innovation and consumer
participation.

While it might benefit customers, zero-rating tilts consumer preferences in favor of specific
applications. This could stifle start-ups, apps developers and content providers who do not have the
market share or attention on their products to make it attractive for operator to provide free data
on their services. Consider, for example, how Facebook’s early development would be stunted had
MySpace or Friendster colluded with mobile operators on a zero-rating initiative to increase activity.
In conclusion, absence of net-neutrality could hinder innovation because the economic challenges
for newcomers would be raised significantly.

Second, the absence of net-neutrality means the plurality of internet as our main platform of
educational and economic benefits will be reduced to a set of menu options, and our participation as
free internet users to mere buyers. An example is Telkomsel’s blockage of Netflix— a known biggest
contender in the streaming service market, ostensibly to raise more traffic into iFlix, an Indosa
has on consumers reducing the infinite plurality of the Internet to a set of menu options. The first
and fourth harm could result in the Internet being reduced to a walled garden.”

Fir Further, zero-rating for Internet uptake still “allows ISPs to tilt the market in favor of specific
applications and to ‘pick winners and losers’ on the Internet.”11 Tilting the market could stifle
competition from local social networks, apps developers and content providers who cannot afford to
pay providers to zero-rate their content or who do not have the market share or eyeballs on their
products to make it attractive to operator to provide free data for their services.

The United Nations Human Rights Council has established that citizens have a right to unfettered
Internet access. Many nations are working to allow their citizens to realise this right. Critics argue
that zero-rating could put this right at risk. For example, van Schewick warns that zero-rating sets a
precedent where low-income American families will be shuttled into “‘walled gardens’ – cutting
them off from free information and full participation” on the Internet

Net Neutrality is a principle which dictates that Internet data should be treated equally by service
providers. Barbra van Schewick, Professor of Law and Faculty Director of the Center for Internet and
Society at Stanford University, explains that zero-rating allows mobile operators and Internet Service
providers to “favor some applications over others and causes the same problems as technical forms
of differential treatment,” like slowing down or blocking certain forms of data.

As a region that almost completely skipped the desktop PC revolution, most citizens here got
their first taste of internet-based communication through social media sites and messaging apps.
Southeast Asia proves its love for messaging apps when one sees that messaging-only apps
repeatedly rank among the top three social platforms in the region. The difference is that unlike
India, where WhatsApp has by and large become ubiquitous, Southeast Asian countries have
platforms like LINE, WeChat, Kakao Talk, Facebook Messenger, Zalo, Viber, and even
Blackberry Messenger giving stiff competition to the big daddy of messaging apps.
For a region that loves and literally lives on chat apps, this is naturally a big space for brands and
advertisers to invest in. From marketing to social customer service, Southeast Asians track
delivery statuses, change flights, and even book cabs on messaging apps. These apps also
have some of the most creative advertising campaigns and significant brand sponsorships in the
region, such as WeChat sponsoring Indonesian Idol and Line’s localized emojis, stickers, and a
USD 10 million advertising budget as early in the lifecycle as 2014!
What is interesting is that these full-fledged consumer platforms are overhauling business
communication too. Filling in the gap left by enterprise communication platforms like Slack and
Lync, messaging apps let you interact, form groups, and exchange files with external parties too,
allowing collaboration beyond the glass doors of conference rooms. That means that a lot of
business – between independent professionals and clients, brands and agencies – happens on
messaging apps. These are interesting times for business and personal communication, and
Southeast Asia is the place to watch how this story unfolds.
But who is using which messaging apps in Southeast Asia? We take a look at the apps making it
big in the region.
hat these companies can pay ISPs to provide more reliable access to their websites than to potential
competitors. Another example is Telkom’s blockage of Netflix, ostensibly to raise traffic to the
Telkom-owned streaming service iFlix.

Over-The-Top services*** e.g. Youtube, share the market with competitors such as Vimeo,
Telegram, or WeChat, each with their own distinctive marketable features.

onsumers’ such as Line or Spotify

Orang kan rely on apps kaya gitu,

Codependent sih -- provider kerjasama ama apps terkenal supaya banyak yg make service nya.

Internet should be the main platform for all individuals and businesses to innovate, expand and
express themselves. In the absence of net-neutrality, though, the outreach of their contents
wouldn’t be determined by quality anymore, but by business decisions made by ISPs.

Secondly, if ISPs a

This could deter innovative start-up services that are unable to purchase priority access from the
ISPs. Also, if ISPs can charge online services to connect to consumers, consumers would ultimately
bear these additional costs (for example, on their monthly Netflix bill or in the cost of products from
a local online store).

With all the advertised benefits, I think people are oblivious to the fact that these providers
disregard net-neutrality because they do not understand what its violation implies. Even
spokesperson of various Indonesian ISPs deny net-neutrality’s need for a second glance because,
allegedly, partnerships with these Over-The-Top services*** are based on mutual trust and benefits.
I will ex

The Internet is our most important platform for economic growth, innovation, competition, free
expression, and broadband investment and deployment. Both creators and end users should be free
to determine the outreach of content based on quality, not leaving this decision to the broadband
provider. Long before its prominence, Facebook was a late comer compared to

As a “general purpose technology,” the Internet has been, and remains to date, the preeminent 21st
century engine for innovation and the economic and social benefits that follow. These benefits flow,
in large part, from the open, endto-end architecture of the Internet, which is characterized by low
barriers to entry for developers of new content, applications, services, and devices and a consumer-
demand-driven marketplace for their products. As the Commission explained in its 2010 Open
Internet Order, the Internet’s open architecture allows innovators and consumers at the edges of
the network “to create and determine the success or failure of content, applications, services and
devices,” without requiring permission from the broadband provider to reach end users.1 As an
open platform, it fosters diversity and it enables people to build communities. 2. We start with a
fundamental

Example of a well-known practice in Indonesia contrary to Net Neutrality principle is zero-rating

practice of providing internet access to certain services (usually data-heavy services) without
financial cost under certain conditions. Several ISPs in Indonesia grant free access or extra internet
quota for specific applications or website, usually a video-streaming websites from companies who
have partnership with them or which they own themselves.

The principle would keep small companies to have fair competition against big and well-capitalized
companies. Without net-neutrality protection, ISPs, especially the major ones, will hold significant
power to control the demand-side of the market. For example, a small Over-The-Top service startup
in video streaming would have a hard time competing with Internet Protocol Television (IPTV)
owned by the ISP even if the startup actually has more innovative content. This means fewer
competitions in the industry, which could eventually turns into a quasi-monopoly state, and it is bad
for us as consumeras.

For big businesses, As customers, we might have to pay extra for unlimited access to certain . As
startups or small business, we might risk shutting down due to

In late August, the firefighters at Santa Clara County Department faced challenges in coordinating
fire response when their network was deliberately slowed down to a minimum by its provider,
Verizon. Completely disregarding possible mortal consequences that it could bring , Verizon’s first
instinct when they complained was to sell them a data package twice as expensive.

This is one example of how absence of net neutrality rules basically allows companies to extort
people for their own gain.

As of June 11, 2018, net neutrality is officially dead. Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
under the Trump administration repealed net neutrality despite escalating activism from the public.

What is net neutrality, and how

Net neutrality is a principle that Internet service providers (ISPs) should provide equal access to all
websites without giving them faster or slower download speeds. Without them, ISPs could give
certain treatment—grant or block access to specific content—to either their subsidiary services or
competitors. For big businesses, As customers, we might have to pay extra for unlimited access to
certain . As startups or small business, we might risk shutting down due to

At the expense of people’s freedom to use the int

In the absence of rules, Verizon and other broadband providers will put profits over people
even when it comes to matters of life and limb

As of June 11, 2018, the FCC’s controversial repeal of the 2015 act that
enshrined net neutrality into law has officially taken effect. That means net
neutrality, currently, no longer exists.
The first responders, with some help from the net neutrality activist group Fight For the
Future, are attempting to force Congress to restore the rules using the Congressional
Review Act, which allows any regulatory action to be overturned by a majority
Congressional vote.

Up until Obama’s government, net neutrality was ensured as a part of the First Amandmen

- Narrative
- Definition  This is called net neutrality. It means....
- Who? When?  Up until Obama’s govt, NN was protected. But in 2017, with Ajit Pai’s FCC
under the Trump admnistation, the bill to repeal NN was published. It won a 54/47, but it
was announced in June 11, 2018 that net neutrality has been repealed officially.

Various websites were put up to continue fight for

- How?  How would companies profit from this and how are the competitors/smaller
companies at the expense of it? How would it negatively affect our usage of internet, strip
us of freedom or extort money from internt users?
- Why?  Why should we fight for net neutrality?
- Implications //

In US, millions voiced public outcry for net neutrality to their federal government. Up until Obama’s

I am Fiya, and I support net neutrality to protect internet against unscrupulous uses by telecom
companies to extort its users as well as our freedom to utilize internet as a platform for knowledge
acquisition

against misuses by big companies to kill

ensure that internet stays an open platform for all people to enrich their knowledge, look for
entertainment, and for business to

Telecom companies already charge for access to the internet; now they are claiming the right to
charge for “preferred status”, which would resultin one company’s content loading faster than
another’s. Why shou

Net neutrality refers to the treatment by ISPs of all contents from all sites and businesses as equal.
Net neutrality is internet as we know it today; with net neutrality, you have freedom to access
whatever website you need . Without it, your information . As Indonesians we are lucky not to deal
with the repeal of net neutrality, but in United States, millions voiced a public outcry for the return
oof