It's not really net neutrality

[Commentary] Net neutrality is a curious piece of regulation that has been spurred on by popular umbrage and letter-writing campaigns (or the modern social media equivalent), but which has been fashioned and will continue to be fashioned by a process of negotiation and defined by a language, wholly opaque to the public. There is no net neutrality, there are only the details of net neutrality, inevitably so fine and shaded and compromised that in the end such regulation might better be known as the "net self-Interest rules."

In effect, we have arrived at a moment in time in which we pass from a, relatively speaking, anything-goes Internet (the current model or standard of net neutrality) into a profoundly regulated and proscribed Internet. Of course, net neutrality advocates have been arguing that the Internet is increasingly controlled by big broadband holders like Comcast, and hence, to restore balance, it needs to be controlled by government regulation. That may well be true. But the larger and more important effect is not about balance or restoring the status quo, but that the Internet passes into some new, more formal arena wherein the powers that be -- all of them -- get to flex their muscles and try to beat the others.