The effects of a “Gated Internet” on small business the web hosting industry

jmcallister · Jul 15, 2006

I wrote this earlier and thought I would share it with everyone. Please let me know what you think. Also mods if this is in the wrong catagory please feel free to move it:

The effects of a “Gated Internet” on small business the web hosting industry

Imagine this: You have a killer idea for a new online business. You spend months developing your web site, you make it SEO (Search engine optimization) friendly, you sign up for web hosting, and you start about the rigorous task of promoting your new small business venture, but no one in your target market comes. You soon discover that many internet service providers are forbidding their customers from viewing your site), so your new internet venture and months of hard work, is now effectively “dead in the water”.

The above scenario is not a reality yet, but could become many business owners, and small web hosting company’s worst nightmare. The stage was set last year when various phone and cable companies successfully reversed the FCC regulation requiring network owner’s to provide nondiscriminatory communications services, and rates.

How does this affect the web hosting industry? If internet service providers (ISP’s) are not required by law to be neutral, in the content they provide the American public, it would allow them to block sites they don’t have a partnership with, or impose a surcharge for viewing a competing company’s web site. For the hosting industry, this would mean a drastic slow down in the creation of new entrepreneurial, and personal web sites, which would in-turn mean a smaller customer base, and lost profits.

The reality of a corporation controlled internet has hit home for many Skype voice over IP (VOIP) users. Prodigy Communications LP has closed the consumer internet ports that Skype and other VOIP services use in an effort to curve bandwidth usage. The blocking of VOIP services is small scale example of the FCC’s internet deregulation. If the Net Neutrality law is not passed the general public, small business owners, and hosting providers could see a radical change in the content they send and receive to internet users.

In the 21st century internet web hosting, has exploded and has sparked a new wave of entrepreneurial success for many small business owners. Net Neutrality prevents companies like AT&T, Verizon, and Comcast from deciding which websites will work, based on who they are affiliated with. If something is not done, web hosting providers, and developers, will have a harder time getting their content online and making their mark on their targeted audience.

labrocca · Jul 15, 2006

Should the government regulate search engines too? Because if the search engines don't list you then you ain't gonna make money either.

Already ISP's block ports and such.

You already noted that if they do block too much content then they will lose customers to competiting services that would open all access.

Allow the free market to reign.

jmcallister · Jul 15, 2006

SEO is up to the webmaster, and if the end user can visit the site should NOT be regulated by your ISP

labrocca · Jul 15, 2006

An ISP is chosen by the users and should not be regulated by the government.

jmcallister · Jul 15, 2006

I think you are confused check this out:

http://www.itsournet.org/

labrocca · Jul 15, 2006

I am not confused at all. I 100% understand this. I was aware of the situation from before. I just don't believe your theory.

You soon discover that many internet service providers are forbidding their customers from viewing your site

Now can you explain to me WHY an ISP would do such a thing? And how would this HELP the ISP? If anything this would create BETTER ISPs and service since competiting services would most likely offer a package of unlimited internet. Were you using the internet 10 years ago? 15 years ago? Back then ISP's were very limited. Choices were terrible and service was just as bad. Now you have choices.

Choices are the key.

Also wouldn't this allow the ISP's to create "Kid accounts"? Currently to protect my kids I have to do so from my home. Wouldn't it be easier for the ISP to do so for it's millions of customers all from one firewall? Again..a choice for consumers that I would sign up for.

Here is a statement from Google.

Wed Jul 05, 2006 at 08:52:26

Martin H. Bosworth writes today:

Search engine giant Google has publicly warned it will challenge any attempt to infringe on access to its content under antitrust law, according to Google vice-president and "Internet evangelist" Vinton Cerf.

Speaking during a press conference in Bulgaria, Cerf stated that if Congress does not pass effective protections for "net neutrality," the company will file litigation against any company that blocks or degrades access to its service.

This is just the case where a bill has expired and they haven't renewed it. Personally I don't think they have to bother. I think the web would stay pretty close to the same. We don't need a law for this.

UpsideARTcom · Jul 16, 2006

Business blocking by an ISP is an interesting thought. I suppose it would depend on what type of business and why it would be in the interest of the ISP to block access (like market shares in a competitor). Hopefully Unlikely, yet possible.

I do remember a little while ago, conspiracy sites affiliated with Alex Jones (conspiracy theory extraordinaire), seemed to have been blocked by Time Warner Cable. This would be politically motivated from an upper echelon with shares in TWC, I suppose.

There are many smaller, independently run ISP options out there- they really take seeking out depending on who you are connected with.

Censoring on the part of the largest ISP's would definitely affect the larger unaware population for sure, affecting potential sales and spread of knowledge.

Access by ISP blocked or not, being new to SEO- I wonder about the ability of an independent entrepreneur to reach the visible section of searches through the experience and capital outlay of larger businesses. I have heard many successful SEO narratives in these forums though so it does seem possible that content and not corporate clout can reach consumers more easily. I suppose that depends on what search engine it is.

http://hackmkultra.gnn.tv/headlines/5317/AOL_Time_Warner_Censors_Alex_Jones_Websites

http://www.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=44525

Echelon17 · Jul 17, 2006

Nice article, however I think you're taking it completely out of context. What are the actual chances of you developing a site that is blocked in some way? Unless it's highly contraversial, completely saturated with global government conspiracy theories or is just plain illegal?

ISP's are within their right to restrict certain services based on their technological capabilities. Bandwidth 'abusers' for example may find certain ports or services capped in order to ensure that the network doesn't suffer.

Information on the other hand is a very awkward area. Take ye age old debate of usenet, for example. If you're not familiar with usenet, or 'binary newsgroups' then here's a little explanation: There's such a thing called usenet in which people can have test discussions much like this forum. In addition to this, usenet supports the ability to submit file attachments. Because of this, you can find a lot of binaries (file attachments) for almost any subject, including pornography and many many many copyright infringing pieces.

Now, it has pretty much always been an ISP policy of providing full usenet access for text discussion and not restricting any of the binaries. Restricting such binaries would mean that the ISP acknowledge the content of the data they are providing and as such may then be held liable if something gets out that was meant to be restricted. Make sense? Ignorance is bliss, in this case.

To me it's illogical that ISP's would block third party content if it poses a threat or is a potential risk of competition. If everyone quit in the face of competition, we wouldn't have as much variation with services as we do these days. Competition makes things improve, that's a fact. Information that they may deem sensitive or potentially illegal would be almost impossible to restrict anyway, given the various sources and mediums out there to distribute it. By blocking it they would again be acknowledging that it exists, so would potentially be liable if they failed to restrict it completely.

So anyway, sorry for blabbering on so much, but my original point still stands. You shouldn't be concerned with things like this unless you plan on making some seriously questionable websites, because there's no way in hell these kind of restrictions would happen to an 'average-joe' website. You can set up an alternative to a big provider, and you think they'll care? You pose no risk to them at all.

Flaresolutions · Jul 17, 2006

I'd laugh if an ISP began censoring or charging to access certain parts of the internet. I mean, if they want a sure-fire way to go into liquidation, they've got a winner. But seriously, if one ISP decides to restrict parts of the internet, im pretty sure they will lose customers FAST. Just because there isnt the written letter of the law to guide them, common sense should tell them it isnt in their interests to do such a thing. Let the ISP dictators come and fall.

labrocca · Jul 17, 2006

I am glad other NP members have the same common sense that I do.

This is just an expiring bill and capital hill is too lazy to care.

Robert Allen · Jul 17, 2006

They block sites like this at my school. I find it not just annoying, it is arrogance. Read my latest posts on www.robertall.com. They filtered all my sites for no reason.

robert

jmcallister · Jul 18, 2006

Actually the whole reason I wrote the article was to induce a conversation on the issue. When I wrote it, I blew the context out of proportion for a reason. The reason was if I said, "Watch out, nothing is going to happen immediatly" then the point of the article would be lost. I only wanted to bring a little light to the subject and grab readers attention, about isps, charging a fee to view non "network" sites. So.... it looks like I got some attention from it, which is good, and it sparked some dialogue

Also, for many highspeed internet customers, ther is only 1 choice in their area, so jumping ship might not be an option.

greenlight · Jul 29, 2006

I get it you guys promote net-neutrality as if that's freedom. Kind of like when liberals cozy up to dictators like castro chavez etc.

You want to impede on my freedom to choose an isp that screens my content for me, because maybe i don't want porn, gambling, viagra ads, viruses, and spam coming at me every time I turn on my computer.

I'm personally sick of having to pay $60 a year plus the initial software on every computer I own to protect my self from jerks.

Why is the freedom to choose an isp a restriction on freedom? Answer that question if you can using logic.

If I want a isp that just provided webpages that are blue/green with no displays of orange because it doen't match my curtains then that is my right to choose. Obviously the more restrictive the isp was the smaller their market would be. But that's the beauty of freedom and capitalism. Choice makes it better for everyone and choice allows competition to thrive and give people what they really want.

Not allowing me the choice impedes on my freedom and therefore inhibits the true potential of the internet by restricting competition.

By the way it says on that website promoting web neutrality that it would hurt a sick child because the mother wouldn't be able to find a website that she needed and the small business owner because they couldn't reach their market.

Think about this:
What does the mother get when she searches for the hospital?
porn sites loaded with keywords about children and hospitals, or SEO'd pages with nonsense articles with ads?

What do you get when you search for a local business? some of the same.

No who fights for freedom? Whose making choices for you?

How does what the isp's want impede on what already exists? If you like the status quo you are free to stay in the status quo.

I want the choice, what choice I make will be determined on what I feel is best for me and my family, and I might very well decided I don't want the isp to screen for me.

What gives you the right to make that choice for me?

Flaresolutions · Jul 29, 2006

Greenlight, can you elaborate on the aim of your post? Sorry, I am probably being dumb but I cant find any particular point that stands out? You just seem to explain you have rights.

MyPGP · Jul 29, 2006

www.SaveTheInternet.Com

movingconcierge · Sep 6, 2006

Anyone who cannot understand how this is a terrible thing should take the folllwing steps before posting:

1) visit savetheinternet.com,
2) go to youtube.com and watch the dozen or more videos put out by various people,
3) THINK! about the analogy of cable tv. How you do not get to choose the channels you view in your area. How that decision is made for you because of the contracts that the cable company signs with the content providers. Now apply that to your use of the internet.
4) THINK! about the analogy of Telecom. How you do not get to choose who provides your landline. If you don't like your landline provider, oh well you're screwed. OK, you could switch ISP's, but, undoubtably in such a scenario, one ISP will not have all the contracts with your preferred providers.

It seems that cable and telcom have stopped fighting and coluded to fleece internet users and silence the critics; And that's just double profits for Washington DC so they vote accordingly. Find out where Your Senators stand on the issue. Then beat down their door and give them hell for selling out! Midterm elections are close at hand...

As I look on the list of senators for and against, a clear trend appears...can you say red states? I hope this doesn't turn into a political debate, but Republican domaineers we need you to go left on this one!

labrocca · Sep 6, 2006

The Telcom is a good analogy to use. So is there anyone you can't call? Do you need AT&T to call AT&T customers?

As for the cable TV analogy....since internet content is FREE...unlike paid channels and networks...are you suggesting that the internet companies will PAY Google so that it's users can do searches there? Ugh...I don't see that happening. The Cable TV providers PAY for channels to be on their network...then build that cost into your monthly bill. That's why you pay for HBO...because the cable company has to pay a premium for HBO to be on it's network. So unless Google begins to start charging the ISP's to have access...your scenario is bunk.

I still see no reason why the ISP's of the world will start blocking everyday common websites. They would lose customers and clients fast. They may however charge more money for full premium access (like unfiltered p0rn or streams)...big deal. I am more than willing to pay a bit more. I already pay for the best line I can get. Before I moved I had DSL and Cable...just for redundancy.

There is still competition in the marketplace. People can also do home networks...or bring in T1 lines. Lots can be done.

The alarmists aren't thinking this out. The law has been around so law that if you delete it...people won't change. The law served it's purpose already of ensuring the internet grew unadulterated. Now it can't be caged.

allroundguy · Sep 9, 2006

The Internet is not the Universe!

You should promote Your business first through the usual channels: Newspapers, magazines, television, word-of-mouth, etc. The Internet comes after that. If You don't know this, You know nothing about the Internet. The Internet is not the WWW, and none of both is Almighty. People first ask around for information, then use the local Yellow Pages. Why should they turn on the computer? If they do have one ... The Internet can be useful, but it is not the Universe. Don't You decide somehow about what the rest of Your family may or may not do? And if not, why then? If You leave control up to others You are out of control. Stop all free things because they kill entrepreneurship. Business is business. Money must roll.

verbster · Sep 10, 2006

You should promote Your business first through the usual channels: Newspapers, magazines, television, word-of-mouth, etc. The Internet comes after that. If You don't know this, You know nothing about the Internet.

Hmmmm.... Just read your post in the "Hotties" string.

The effects of a “Gated Internet” on small business the web hosting industry

Established Member

Top Member

Established Member

Top Member

Established Member

Top Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Top Member

VIP Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

VIP Member

Top Member

Established Member

Blue MooseTop Member

Similar threads

We're social

Pinned

Appreciation

Agreement