1

Situating Net neutrality in its broader context

Towards an analytical framework for the distribution of content on the InternetInternet

Leo Van Audenhove (IBBT-SMIT)Luciano Morganti (IBBT-SMIT)

Net neutrality

Net neutralityRefers to the use of technology in distribution of content

Network management technologiesg gNegative term

Objecting to any interference in local/national networksFocused on single ISPs

Internet end-to-end networkCrossing networksCrossing national boundaries

Use of technologies to shape the flow of contentRelated to the struggle of the distribution of contentElement in control of value chains for online products and servicesShould be analyzed in a much broader framework.

2

2

Theoretical contributions

Many of the works from legal fieldLessig’s work on regulation - different forms of regulation

Government, Markets, Social norms, ‘Code’Software and architecture regulating ‘what’ can be done in cyberspace = networkWork mainly focuses on copyright and DRM

Zittrain similar argument at level of appliances and devicesMany of the new devices are ‘closed’ devices

iPhone, iPod, mobile phones, Game platforms, Tivo’s, etc.Zittrain argues that our access to the Internet might change from generative devices such as computers to closed devices such as e g Nintendo Wiidevices, such as computers, to closed devices such as e.g. Nintendo Wii

Both authors argue that ‘generative’ end-to-end nature of internet might disappear

Due to changing technologyDue to changing laws supporting technologyDue to market mechanisms

3

Building an analytical framework

DefinitionsStart from a broad definition of governanceAdhere to the conceptualization of ‘code’ as means of regulationAdhere to the conceptualization of code as means of regulation

Analytical framework to systematize thinkingHow industry and governments starting to:

1.Use ‘code’ to exert control2.Changing regulatory environments in support of use of ‘code’

Distinction in a layered model between:1.Internet actors2.Dimensions of control3.Technologies of control4.Regulation

4

3

Building an analytical framework

Focus Distribution of content (audiovisual)End-to-end

Server – first mile – cloud – last mile – device - user Looking at how technology is developed/used

To control specific aspects of distributionTo control specific aspects of accessTo control attention of the user

Looking at how industry is using these technologiesTo protect current and new business models

Looking at why government supports certain uses through regulationMain argument is

That you have to look at the whole distribution chainThat you have to look at interaction of technologies of control

5

Controlling distribution - Dimensions

Time – Who can access what when?Space – Who can access what where?Speed – What contents can travel at what speed?Speed – What contents can travel at what speed?Quality – What contents gets prioritized at what quality?Access – Who gets access to what under what conditions?Attention – Who sees what under what conditions?

Are central dimension of control in distribution of contentDevelopments in technology strengthen possibility of controlp gy g p y

6

4

Control over time and space

Questions idea of Internet as a global economic spaceInterest of the private sector

Diversification of marketsDiversification of markets Windowing in audiovisual marketsLicensing of content material in different markets

Price differentiationAccording to purchasing power

e.g. online gaming industryg g g y

Different currenciesE.g. iTunes has different offerings in different marketsE.g. Audible restricts access due to rights issuesE.g. many online VOD restricted to national markets

BBC iPlayer, Channel4D, Movielink 7

Control over speed and quality

Questions idea of Internet as ‘neutral’ platformInterest of the private sector

C t b i f d f d liCompete on basis of speed of deliveryCompete on basis of quality of service – videoCompete on better ‘global’ presence

Both at local level as on global level importantE.g. CNN, BBC, etc. use overlay networks such as AkamaiAkamaiE.g. Google, Microsoft, etc. invest in own infrastructures close to ‘Western’ consumersE.g. blocking/narrowing of P2P by Viacom and BellCanada

8

5

Control over access and attention

Questions internet as an ‘open/unmediated’ spaceInterest of private sector (positive)

Competition on prime contentCompetition on prime contentGuide towards prime contentAdapt offering according to taste and placeE.g. research results of search/websites

Interest of private sector (negative)Filter out illegal or unwanted contentFilter out illegal or unwanted content

E.g. wikipedia blocks certain content related to child foto’s

Interest of governmentProhibition to access harmful content

Hate speech, decency, etc.Political content 9

Technological means of control

GeoIPID Management

Bank Card InformationDRMCDN

Content Delivering NetworksOverlay networksServerparks

Peering Network management techniquesFiltering/Identification

WatermarkingFingeringDeep packet inspection

10

6

Introducing a model

11

Video industry: control and instruments

12

7

ISPs: control and instruments

13

Control in the distribution chain

14

8

The model and regulation

15

Integration

16

9

Current discussions

Identification – filtering – graduated responseGeographic differentiation – multi territory licensingNet neutrality

17

Graduated response

France ISP will monitor Internet trafficEnforcement overseen by new state agency HADOPIEnforcement overseen by new state agency HADOPI

High Authority for Copyright Protection and Dissemination of Work son the Internet

After three infringements thrown of of the network

18

10

Graduated response

ApplicationsFrance, will be implemented 2009 with enforcementUK voluntary and no enforcementUK, voluntary and no enforcementItaly considers following French exampleJapan, P2P solution under discussionSouth Korea, New Zeeland, Australia under discussion

EU parliament voted against disconnecting infringersvoted against disconnecting infringers

European CommissionCreative Content Online questions to stakeholdersReport will appear shortly

19

Graduated response

UKAgreement between BPI and 6 biggest ISPsContent industry monitors illegal content on P2PContent industry monitors illegal content on P2P

ISP retains relation with costumer ISP not responsible for monitoring or policing

BPI turns over IP address information to ISPISPs duty to notify subscribers about infringementNo enforcement foreseen yet-discussion with OfcomNo enforcement foreseen yet discussion with Ofcom

20

11

Quid Filtering ?

Content industry likely to keep pushing for filteringRaises lots of questions

P li i l ISPPuts policing role on ISPsPuts costs at level of ISPsApparently has negative effects on network

Question whether technology readyEspecially for video finger printing, hashing, watermarking but quality not certainwatermarking, but quality not certainAll other filtering technology (at level of firms, universities, homes) have serious flaws

For whom?Hollywood, music majors, local industry, etc.

21

Geographical differentiation

Content availability depends on national licensing systemsCan be supported by geoIP identity managementCan be supported by geoIP, identity management

Leads to diversification of marketsWithin Europe in conflict with single market ideaCreative Content Online questions on multi-territory licencing

22

12

Conclusions

RegulationCode (instruments) improve to control aspects of the InternetLegal environment is changing and will be different for videoLegal environment is changing and will be different for video than for audioSlow globalization of copyright law - but stronger in centreNet neutrality discussion and outcome uncertainPossible stimulation of EU of European content platforms

Copyright protectionPossible move and push towards filtering

Trade off between compliance and prime content

23

Trade off between compliance and prime content Questions role of ISP as just carrierBrings regulation into muddy waters (many legal issues concerning privacy, role of ISPs, liability, etc.)Different legal systems and case law might result in different solutions in different countries