Digital

Vaizey claims to be pro net-neutrality, though mainly by defining it differently

By | Published on Tuesday 23 November 2010

The government’s Communications Minister Ed Vaizey has responded to allegations he is against so called ‘net neutrality’, claiming he has been misquoted on the issue. Though his new claims that he does, in fact, support ‘net neutrality’ are mainly enabled by him adopting a different definition of the term than the rest of us.

As previously reported, last week at an FT conference in London, Vaizey implied he would be OK with internet service providers connecting their users to certain websites faster than others, most likely charging a fee to the website owner for guaranteed fast connection.

Some ISPs support such a system because it provides them with an extra revenue stream (they can charge a fee to website owners as well as the people accessing those sites). But many argue a ‘two-tiered’ internet would give an unfair advantage to cash rich website owners, hindering the growth of smaller and start up web and content companies, which are generally responsible for the most innovation.

Various people have spoken out in opposition to Vaizey’s comments, including, from the music side, Peter Gabriel. Though it was allegations that his views on this issue ran contrary to those of British world wide web inventor Tim Berners Lee that has got Ed a bit hot under the collar.

Defending his comment from last week, he has told The Guardian: “I say ‘don’t block access’. It’s my first principle. I say the same as Berners-Lee”. He adds that people who say he is anti-net neutrality haven’t read his speech properly.

However, while Vaizey is clear that all websites that don’t breach other laws (eg copyright, privacy, fraud etc) should be assured access to the entire general public, oblivious of the ISP they use, he quite clearly supports the idea of website owners possibly having to pay for that privilege, which opens the doors for a two-tier internet which, by most people’s definition, conflicts with the principles of net neutrality.  

In his speech last week Vaizey remarked that future developments in the internet could include “the evolution of a two-sided market where consumers and content providers could choose to pay for differing levels of quality of service”.

So, semantics aside, I think all the comments made last week by Gabriel et al against Vaizey’s viewpoint on this still stand. Whatever the minister might think.



READ MORE ABOUT: |