One of the serious issues rarely addressed in the continued calls to regulate network neutrality is that the term means different things to different people. The central concept of network neutrality is rather simple—that the Internet should remain open to all users to access any content. But beyond that, there are different ideas and ideals that make it a much more complicated issue. For instance, some contend that regulation should prevent Internet service providers from giving preferential treatment to any content or application provider, or from entering into exclusive content deals. Still others want network owners to strictly adhere to a nonproprietary, standardized Internet protocol (this protocol ignores emerging applications and technologies). And, again, for some the push for regulation is primarily to prohibit ISPs from restricting users’ access to content—although there’s no evidence that any providers have attempted to block access to legal content.

So, there’s no clear definition of network neutrality. And, despite the hype, there’s no evidence of a real problem, no consensus on what the potential problems might be, and no consensus on how to solve the hypothetical problems. Innovation has and will continue to propel the Internet in new directions without governmental regulation. Any ISP that degrades service, blocks access, or fails to innovate will be punished by a quick loss of customers.

At Cox Communications, our customers can visit any legal web site they wish on our open network (although we must adhere to laws requiring us to restrict access to illegal websites such as child pornography). We don’t, and won’t, block our customers’ access to legal Internet content.

Cox and other ISPs need to continue investing in our networks to deliver the applications and required bandwidth selected by our customers. It’s a fast-changing world, and a considerable amount of capital investment is required to keep up with it. Regulation would dampen the incentive to invest in networks. ISPs and customers are both well-served if networks are operated in a way that benefits the vast majority of customers and their growing need for bandwidth.

The phenomenal growth of the Internet continues, creating serious challenges for network owners. Network management is complicated by multimedia, file sharing, and other applications requiring huge amounts of bandwidth. Broadband providers are rightfully concerned that proponents of network neutrality are casting such a wide net that the ability of providers to effectively manage the traffic on their networks could be impeded. For example, as the amount of traffic from VoIP, gaming, digital video recorders, and streaming video increases, service providers must prioritize those demands since those applications are more sensitive to latency. But we must also create the bandwidth that guarantees service reliability.

The marketplace will drive demand for advanced services and classes of offerings. Ultimately, the competitive marketplace—not government regulation—will dictate what’s best for Internet customers.