“I hope congress can protect Net Neutrality, so I can continue to innovate in the internet space.” – Sir Tim Berners-Lee (Inventor of the Internet).

“It’s not a big truck. It’s a series of tubes.” – Senator Ted Stevens (Opponent of Net Neutrality).

To many, the idea of network neutrality is integral to the way the internet works. From the inventor of the internet himself, through to some of the largest corporations such as Google and Microsoft, all the way down to grass roots movements like “Save the Internet,” the idea enjoys a huge amount of support.

At the core of the idea of net neutrality are the principles that there be no restrictions on content, sites, platforms, networking hardware, or equipment that can use the internet and that if a user pays for a certain level of access to the internet, they should be granted that level of access across the network. A fair enough idea and one that has worked well for us in the past.

Among opponents of that idea are members of cable and telecommunications companies and others who have a vested financial interest in controlling (and charging for) network access. That is no particular surprise. Among the vested interests however, are a couple of very surprising groups and individuals. People and groups who perhaps should know better. Let’s take a look at the more surprising ones.

David Farber

Who is he?

David Farber is one of the internet’s most distinguished engineers famed for his contributions to computer networking as well as programming languages. He is a professor of computer science at Carnegie Mellon University and has an extremely distinguished career in academia as well as the private sector.

Choice Quote: “Network neutrality is supposed to promote continuing Internet innovation by restricting the ability of network owners to give certain traffic priority based on the content or application being carried or on the sender’s willingness to pay. The problem is that these restrictions would prohibit practices that could increase the value of the Internet for customers.”

Why does he oppose net neutrality?

It is true that AT&T at one point did finance a position paper by David Farber, but as Farber himself has pointed out, he held his position on net neutrality publicly prior to being paid for that paper. Reasonably, then we cannot really say he has a financial vested interest in the debate like many others. At the core of his opposition to net neutrality though, is his belief that legislating net neutrality may lead to many unexpected and unwelcome outcomes given that many of the premises and terminology of the debate cannot be agreed upon.

Why is his opposition to net neutrality surprising?

This is a case of strange bedfellows. What is interesting, is David Farber’s choice of organizations to which he has volunteered his time. He has sat on the board of the Electronic Frontiers Foundation, an organization whose support for net neutrality is steadfast. He has also sat on the advisory board of the Electronic Privacy Information Center and the board of trustees of the Internet Society – two more organizations who claim support for the general principles of net neutrality. Yet David Farber remains an opponent.

Bob Kahn

Who is he?

Bob Kahn is regarded by many as the father of the internet. As one of the main inventors of TCP (Transmission Control Protocol) and IP (Internet Protocol), he is intimately familiar with the way that information is transferred across the internet. He has more awards to do with the Internet than most people have had hot dinners including the Presidential Medal of Freedom and has been inducted into the National Inventors’ Hall of Fame.

Choice Quote: “As far as I am concerned [net neutrality] is a slogan.”

Why is he against net neutrality?

According to Kahn’s way of thinking, the imposition of network neutrality via legislation stifles innovation. Net neutrality legislation, he fears, would inhibit the ability of engineers working on moving data at faster and faster speeds across networks. Innovation from companies working on the Internet should not take precedence over companies or individuals working on innovating the core elements on the Internet itself.

Why is his opposition to net neutrality surprising?

Bob Kahn’s opposition to net neutrality came as a surprise to many considering his Internet pedigree. It was in tandem with Vinton Cerf that he invented TCP and IP. Cerf remains one of the most vocal supporters of net neutrality. Their views on internet neutrality could not be more opposite.

Bram Cohen

Who is he?

Bram Cohen is the creator of BitTorrent and is widely regarded as one of the brightest minds on the Internet. He invented the idea of splitting files into several chunks which could be simultaneously downloaded from several peers – an innovation as previous peer-to-peer systems were slow due to their single file and single peer as a source of downloads. He is working in conjunction with movie companies to utilize this technology for legal movie distribution.

Choice Quote: “I most definitely do not want the Internet to become like television where there’s actual censorship… however it is very difficult to actually create network neutrality laws which don’t result in an absurdity like making it so that ISPs can’t drop spam or stop… attacks.”

Why does he oppose net neutrality?

Cohen’s opposition to net neutrality seems to stem from technical concerns. He believes that the ability to examine packets of information in order to distinguish nefarious uses (such as DDOS attacks) is integral to allowing ISPs to function efficiently. He hasn’t given any clear message on the assertion of net neutrality proponents that internet companies could use the same technique to slow certain types of traffic or deny service to competing commercial interests.

Why is his opposition to net neutrality surprising?

If one were cynical, looking at Cohen’s interests, his opposition might not really be that surprising. Perhaps it is simply more disappointing that somebody whose contribution to the internet has been so huge and who, up until recently, most would have assumed was a supporter of net neutrality has chosen the opposite path. His latest technology innovation, in partnership with a firm called Cachelogic, would see massive priority given to traffic that subscribed to their service (ie, data would be delivered much faster). Even according to Cohen, “Depending on how you define net neutrality that violates some definitions of it.” A shame.