Net neutrality is the principle that advocates for impartial transmission of data packets disregarding the destination/origin, content or even the equipment used. This principle advocates for a situation, whereby a user is able to connect freely without any delay or having to pay extra charges (SearchNetworking, n.d.).
In the US, the broadband providers are seeking to enact a legislation that will enable them to run a two-tiered model; the implication of this model is that the ISPs will charge higher fees for the priority placement and enhanced speed for their clients. Thus violating this impartial principle as this would mean that some websites will be given more priority than others depending on the amount they are willing to pay. This will result to un-even ground and impact negatively on the competition, since only the larger sites will be getting priority, since they are the one who can afford the fees. Obama administration has prioritized net neutrality, but still the broadband carriers are not yet content with the decision. This issue has as well sparked debate all over the world as to which principle will be more favorable. Canada is still debating on the matter while keeping open to the principle. The European Union has already passed some legislation supporting the concept. In Asia, Japan and South Korea have already adopted the network neutrality, but China remains an obstacle blocking contents that seems against the government. In Africa and South America the debate has not been critical owing to low broadband accessibility (Albarran, 2009). There are several impacts that might result in scrapping the principle of net neutrality; these include: blocking applications as a way of attracting a website to pay more. An ISP might reserve a particular bandwidth for a particular price, thus bringing the need to inspect the data and thus, compromising on the rights on privacy. This as well will result in the compromise of the international quality as non-prioritized traffics will be blocked from the end user. This can as well open an avenue that can be exploited by colluding with some ICPs to give priority to their packets. This will impact negatively on the competition as the ISPs will be literally choosing whom to favor in the business. This can as well result in consumers being charged, according to the speed of the data packet they are receiving thus compromising on the quality depending on the price. This is not to say that one should not pay high price for high quality but net neutrality should be done in a manner that will benefit everyone not just the large corporations willing to steer the process to their interests (Renda, 2008).
The principle of net neutrality is a positive move towards innovation in the internet business. This is so, since small sites as personal blogs given the same priority as the larger sites as Google will limit the competition to only the quality of the content, but not the size of the firm. The implication of this is that large sites will strive to maintain the highest quality of the contents as they risk being knocked off the business by newly emerging smaller sites with high quality content.