× Thanks for reading! Log in to continue. Enjoy more articles by logging in or creating a free account. No credit card required. Log in Sign up {{featured_button_text}}

The debate over net neutrality seems to have died down a bit. Most stakeholders are in agreement on the core principles of an open internet, including internet content providers (like Netflix and Youtube) and internet service providers (ISPs) who deliver that content to consumers.

In an attempt to clear up some of the confusion over the issue, here’s what the stakeholders generally agree on when it comes to net neutrality: ISPs should not prioritize internet content, data, or networks. That means that all of these things should be treated the same online. This is what most people mean when they use the term net neutrality — and it is important to underscore that this concept is not controversial anymore.

However, the path to ensuring net neutrality is still controversial. The current approach, enacted two years ago by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) under the Obama Administration, is a heavy-handed, top-down approach that has proven problematic for many stakeholders. Rather than formulate rules specific to the unique circumstances of the internet, the FCC simply shoehorned regulation of it into an existing set of rules originally designed for the Ma Bell telephone era. It has not been a good fit.