The "network neutrality" applicability was questioned by time

Text / Crescent

The Internet has an unwritten rule called "Network Neutrality." The rule is mainly aimed at the network operator (ICP) and the Internet service provider (ISP). It emphasizes that the former should treat the latter equally and must not adopt the principle of " The different methods of charging.

(For example, in China, as an operator of a network operator, it is an enterprise such as China Telecom, China Unicom, and Great Wall Broadband, playing the role of an Internet service provider and is an enterprise such as Sina, Tencent and Baidu.

For example, network operators provide network access products, it is like building a highway, and network service providers are on this highway driving a variety of vehicles, whether it is Mercedes-Benz, or Toyota, are At the same price to pay tolls.

However, network operators have been dissatisfied with this rule because heavy vehicles, in their view, consume more road load than light vehicles, so they have always been hoping to take the ladder charge, unwilling to remain neutral. However, Internet service providers and the public do not accept this kind of discriminatory opinion. The laws of most countries in the world are still on the side of Internet service providers. CMCSA, a U.S. network operator, once reduced the latter's network speed because some of the file-sharing sites that connect to its network consume a large amount of bandwidth. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Punishment.

However, this rule of "network neutrality" does not necessarily mean detrimental to network service providers at any time. When the competitive environment is fierce, if network service providers are willing to pay extra fees, network operators will be able to speed up traffic transmission Give yourself some preferential treatment, then the growing capital support network service providers giants are not "stubborn."

Google is a representative of the Internet service providers, it has been the world's largest consumer traffic, many network operators want to give Google this rich households "heavy tax", and Google has always pursued "network neutrality" principle, refused Be treated differently. However, in recent years, Google is changing its position.

In 2008, the Wall Street Journal reported that Google frequently negotiated privately with network operators such as major US cable companies and telcos in an effort to get discounts on Internet speed. Google later rebutted that it was in contact with the network operator, but simply applied for placing some of its own private servers in the network operator's network. When users accessed some of Google's high-traffic services - such as watching videos on Youtube - - They do not have to go to the network operator's public network and can do the data transfer directly from the private network deployed by Google, so network operators can easily (avoid being over-consumed by Google's big users) and Google can flexibly configure their private Server for users to achieve the best user experience over public networks.

Obviously, "network neutrality" has begun to be shaken, and its applicability has also been questioned by time.

Network operators are opposed to the idea of ​​"network neutrality" is not without merit. After all, the threat of "pipelining" plagues all network operators in the world. There is no rule that requires Microsoft to provide only the operating system and not to enter other markets. There is no rule requirement Google search only for life can not be involved in other industries, why should have such a rule requires network operators can always be placed in the status of traffic pipe?

At a time when the mobile Internet is booming, wireless network-based network operators are beginning to plan to change the role of "purely pipeline." Last year, Google and France Telecom to reach out to pay the latter to obtain traffic priority privileges, which Let "network neutrality" be further isolated from the mobile Internet. Even in conservative Europe, in the United States, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rejected the FCC's "net neutrality" application earlier this year in the view that such disputes should be left to the market game To solve, no agency shall enjoy the power of law enforcement in the form of external intervention.

The position of China's relevant policies is actually very close to that of the United States at this time. Last year, "WeChat Charges" intensified when MIIT Minister Miao Wei also publicly declared that "the market to the market" is the best way to quell the debate. I believe business intelligence has the ability to break the competition while compromising a compromise solution.

Soon after, "WeChat Charges" was quickly put on hold. Network operators started the "de-telecomization" campaign and made "smart pipe" plans. Some actively entered the OTT market (China Telecom and NetEase collaborated to launch YiXin products) Some managed to enter the application distribution domain (China Mobile raised the high called a "MM" mobile application market), and some deep cooperation with network service providers to explore the possibility of business integration (Guangdong Unicom and WeChat launched a custom Traffic package business).

Hayek said: "The issue of coordination is an indispensable part of the market development process, and the failure of coordination can lead to a higher degree of coordination of the market economy." This is the reason. When a one-size-fits-all "toll collection" has failed to be coordinated, all parties involved in the competition will naturally seek a more elaborate coordination line and gradually reach a compromise in different directions.

The latest case is that QQ space mobile version and Guangdong Unicom launched the "sign in to send traffic" activities, China Unicom users sign in the activities of QQ space, in exchange for a certain flow of return, "the highest peak of yellow diamond users can have 250M free traffic, ordinary users can have 220M free traffic. "It is said that this round of cooperation has lasted a month, a total of 571 million users to participate, a total of traffic to receive eligibility 130 million M.

This is a proof that network operators and network service providers still have room for cooperation outside the competition. The QQ space intended to open up mobile territory wants to reduce the threshold for users' use of their services (traffic cost) as much as possible, while China Unicom hopes to bundle best-selling services To obtain new users, the common interests of a new model of cooperation, the two sides share the same value chain, each director, each taking what they need.

Similar to the order of reform and opening up, the reform of China's network operators also started from the Guangdong region. Various directional traffic packages came from the businesses of Guangdong Telecom and Guangdong Unicom. According to the inside information of the network operators, this "test water" based on the economically developed areas in the south is based on the idea of ​​seeking solutions and seeking innovative input-output ratios under the control of cost risks and on the other hand, Business "reality, face and bear the brunt of OTT, and then to the network service providers show their good, with each other to find new business opportunities.

To China Unicom, for example, the choice of cooperation with Tencent, issued by the group level documents. Tencent's top-notch products - QQ, WeChat, QQ Space, QQ E-mail, etc. - are all network services at the national level. Ma also promoted the company's social data mining within Tencent because the social relationship itself is "Treasure", as long as it is properly mined, can certainly become a new profit growth point. Another executive at Tencent, Liu Chih-ping, also compared the revenue structure of the two social giants Tencent and Facebook: "90% of Facebook's revenue comes from advertising, and 90% of our revenue comes from users' payments. Therefore, we think Our social network has great potential, we can get this advertising revenue. "It is also to see Lei Jun sell red rice in the QQ space, Vanke in the QQ space to sell real estate success, China Unicom realized the traffic" premium " Is the traditional pipe can not be identified and acquired, so the entry of Guangdong Unicom, Tencent actually asked for a cooperation voucher, once Tencent mining social treasure work has been by leaps and bounds, as the mobile era of network operators, China Unicom Can continue to exchange "priority" with Tencent - for example, Tencent get Unicom get "traffic priority" (directional, free, etc.), China Unicom to find Tencent get "sharing priority" (traffic premium into).

Even Facebook, the defender of "cyber neutrality," was once a critic of Google's compromise on behavior and a sponsor of the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) legislation on "cyber neutrality" The burden on users of mobile traffic to emerging markets, if not adjusted outside the principle of neutrality, the entire evolution of the mobile Internet will be dragged down by the rules. In the United States, Facebook has reached a no-frills marketing plan with GoSmart, a T-Mobile U.S.-owned prepaid service, which is generally low- and middle-income in the United States, while another network operator, AT & T, Consumer Electronics Show in Vegas announced similar to China's "targeted value-added traffic planning." Both network operators and network service providers have gradually come to a consensus that if they refuse to cooperate and are unwilling to pay for the reduction of the access system for mobile networks, they will certainly have a negative impact on the enthusiasm of users, resulting in The slowdown in growth has done both harm and no good for both operations.

In general, the original intention of "network neutrality" was originally intended to establish a fair competitive market. However, when there is a conflict between fairness and freedom, the market tends to favor more of the latter. After all, when someone is willing and able to afford a private car, those who still need to get on the bus may be unhappy, but it is wise to work hard to make it affordable for private cars rather than on the bus Of other passengers together to get someone's private car smashed.