Search results

The purpose of this study is to categorize network neutrality according to its issues under debate and assess the state of the debate based on such organization. In addition, the study discusses the reasons that network neutrality is so difficult to solve and the future research directions that would do so.

This study presents a critical review of the current network neutrality issues and summarizes the economic background of each position in the debate. The relevant literature is organized by issue to examine the reasons that the network neutrality debate is so difficult to solve and determine the further study required to solve it.

An analysis of the relevant literature suggests that the proponents and opponents of network neutrality disagree on the best methods of developing the Internet. Therefore, future research and regulatory and practitioners’ applications would greatly benefit from a comprehensive review of that literature.

Network neutrality regulation is receiving increased attention because the development and significant influences of the Internet are becoming more apparent.

The COVID-19 pandemic provides an opportunity to review net neutrality and the notion that bright light rules are necessary to hold broadband providers from exercising market power. The 2015 Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Open Internet Order asserted that broadband providers have the capability and incentive to harm their customers and third-party service providers. It imposed a set of rules to control broadband providers’ offers, prices, and traffic management. The 2017 FCC vacated all but the transparency provisions of the OIO, restoring the oversight of broadband to the FTC.

This paper offers a review of the evidence regarding the effects of net neutrality regulation, including an investigation of the incidence of violations, or lack thereof, during the 2020 pandemic in the United States. It provides a review of the net neutrality literature and the international research on broadband provider behaviour during COVID-19. The paper presents original research conducted with FCC and FTC reports and a survey of news stories. Brief reviews of federal data on network performance and broadband adoption provide additional context. Given the limited incidence of violations that could be uncovered for the period, the paper suggests why broadband providers behaved opposite to regulatory advocates’ predictions. Contrary to many policy assertions, broadband providers did not block or throttle service, nor did they increase prices arbitrarily or decrease quality. Broadband providers appeared to expand availability, lower broadband prices, and make more networks available, frequently without customer charge. The paper suggests how policy could be updated to reflect the actual behaviour of broadband providers.

This article considers internet system development with reference to what is currently termed the “network neutrality” debate; its aim is to develop improved ways of reasoning about the role of the public interest in networked communications infrastructures.

To assess the degree to which a general non‐discrimination rule would be possible or useful, this article this article reviews documented examples of differential service by internet service providers that already occur. It then compares these practices to older debates about common carriage.

Most of the debate about network neutrality focuses on a few kinds of content discrimination, while there are many more varieties at work. While the focus of the debate has been legal, the problem is often technological. Many kinds of discrimination are now at work, often secretly.

Rather than one grand, neutral rule for a neutral internet, there is a need for a normative framework that can provide a larger picture of the role of this infrastructure in society, and therefore a way to reason about whether a particular kind of discrimination is normatively good or bad. There is also a need for more public disclosure of actions taken internally by internet providers.

This paper provides a set of examples that expand the scope of the network neutrality debate, adding nuance and complexity. It also calls into question the novelty of the issue and suggests that it is unlikely that a single rule (or a small set of general rules) will resolve this dispute.

Airtel, the leading mobile operator in India was going to launch the “Airtel Zero” platform that would charge service providers and OTT providers on the internet for mobile data traffic but would allow end consumers free access to the web sites that were signed up for the platform. The case revolves around the questions of pricing these data services to the service providers in a market where the price to one set of customers (the end consumer) was not independent of the price to another set of customers (the OTT service providers) - typical of two sided markets. Issues of net neutrality and competition have been considered alongside.

This paper aims to focus on the interplay between the market of contents and telecom operators. Traditional telecom operators are vulnerable to the new markets and services that appear as a consequence of accessibility to the Internet and, in particular, in the face of over-the-top content as Netflix.

The authors build a conceptual framework to analyze the response strategies by telecom operators in the context of an evolving TV technology.

They argue that the technology that enabled bundling of services was the entry door of telecom operators to the content market and that, nowadays, online TV may be their exit door if they do not display innovative strategies to remain in this market.

This is the first paper exploring the interplay between the market of contents and telecom operators with a focus in countries from Latin America.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a brief introduction to the telecommunication reform process in Europe, its status, and upcoming policy issues. Furthermore, it also aims to provide an overview of the papers in this special issue.

The paper provides an introduction to the telecom reform process based on previous research and the papers in this issue of info.

The introduction argues that the European telecommunication reform process with the telecommunications green paper of 1987 as an important point of departure has been a success in many ways. It has, for example, facilitated the development of mobile, of the internet and its many applications, and considerably lowered prices. However, there are important areas where a single European market has not developed. Moreover, new challenges are rising in terms of upcoming reconfigurations of the whole information communications technology (ICT) area requiring new policy and regulatory answers.

The paper provides a brief introduction to the European telecommunication reform process, its achievements, present challenges, and the policy responses of the European Union. In addition, an overview of the papers of this issue of info is provided.

Promoting electric vehicles (EVs) is an effective way to achieve carbon neutrality. If EVs are widely adopted, this will undoubtedly be good for the environment. The purpose of this study is to analyze the impact of network externalities and subsidy on the strategies of manufacturer under a carbon neutrality constraint.

In this paper, the authors propose a game-theoretic framework in an EVs supply chain consisting of a government, a manufacturer and a group of consumers. The authors examine two subsidy options and explain the choice of optimal strategies for government and manufacturer.

First, the authors find that the both network externalities of charging stations and government subsidy can promote the EV market. Second, under a relaxed carbon neutrality constraint, even if the government’s purchase subsidy investment is larger than the carbon emission reduction technology subsidy investment, the purchase subsidy policy is still optimal. Third, under a strict carbon neutrality constraint, when the cost coefficient of carbon emission reduction and the effectiveness of carbon emission reduction technology are larger, social welfare will instead decrease with the increase of the effectiveness of emission reduction technology and then, the manufacturer’s investment in carbon emission reduction technology is lower. In the extended model, the authors find the effectiveness of carbon emission reduction technology can also promote the EV market and social welfare (or consumer surplus) is the same whatever the subsidy strategy.

The network externalities of charging stations and the subsidy effect of the government have a superimposition effect on the promotion of EVs. When the network effect of charging stations is relatively strong, government can withdraw from the subsidized market. When the network effect of charging stations is relatively weak, government can intervene appropriately.

Comparing previous studies, this study reveals the impact of government intervention, network effects and carbon neutrality constraints on the EV supply chain. From a sustainability perspective, these insights are compelling for both EV manufacturers and policymakers.

Video distribution over the internet leads to heated net‐neutrality related debates between network operators and over‐the‐top application providers. The purpose of this paper is to analyze this debate from a new perspective that takes into account all of the assets that companies try to exploit in the so‐called battle for eyeballs in video distribution.

The systematic value chain analysis is used to determine the points along the value chain where net neutrality interacts with video distribution. The inputs to the analysis are the existing and proposed policy measures for net neutrality in Europe and in the USA, and a number of net neutrality incidents that have led to discussions earlier.

The paper finds that the current and proposed policy measures aimed at net neutrality each contribute to a certain extent to their intended effects. However, the analysis also shows that they are likely to lead to new debates in other parts of the value chain, as players try to compensate the loss of influence or revenue streams by rearranging the ways in which they exploit their assets.

Further and new debates are expected in the areas of peering and interconnection, distribution of resources between over‐the‐top and managed services and the role of devices with tightly linked search engines, recommendation systems and app stores.

The new perspectives offered by our value‐chain based analysis are valuable for policy makers who aim to promote net neutrality and simultaneously stimulate competition and innovation throughout the value chain.

This study aims to explore the impact of carbon neutral announcements on “stock market value” of publicly listed companies in China.

The event study approach is adopted. Market, market-adjusted, Carhart four-factor model and a cross-sectional regression model are employed to examine the impacts of carbon neutral announcements on “stock market value” of Chinese companies based on data from 188 carbon neutral announcements.

Carbon neutral announcements positively impact Chinese shareholder value. Carbon neutral announcements at the strategic level have a more positive and significant impact on Chinese stock market value. Innovative carbon neutral announcements do not significantly cause Chinese stock market reactions. Companies have more positive and significant stock market reactions when the companies make carbon neutral announcements that reflect high supply chain network resilience and heterogeneity and strong supply chain network relationships.

The findings uncover the business value of carbon neutral activities and provide operations managers in developing countries insights into how to improve enterprises' market value by actively implementing carbon neutral activities.

This paper is the first trial to apply an event study to examine the relationship between carbon neutral announcements and Chinese stock market value from the perspective of announcement level and type and supply chain networks. This paper introduces corporate reputation theory and enriches the application of corporate reputation theory in the field of low-carbon environmental protections and supply chains.

The article addresses the FCC Network Neutrality Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to clarify its importance, timeliness and concerns in relation to Commission market administration and industrial rationalization duties and obligations. It notes industry rivalry, proposed regulatory policy concerning managed services and non‐discriminatory network administration, and voluntary and mandatory Network Neutrality standards.

The paper provides and analysis of the FCC Notice.

The article notices the FCC's approach to “non‐discriminatory” conduct as a feasible public policy, which could stimulate innovation and investment. It specifies fruitful areas for Network Neutrality public policy.

The article concisely evaluates a major FCC initiative.