So I've been looking at the responses and there's some interesting facts I'd like to point out. They probably will surprise you.
First of all, the media has probably completely botched what "net neutrality" is. It's not about fast lanes or information or any of that. Based on the survey results we have so far, the term "net neutrality" is "network neutrality".
It actually means that the network infrastructure is being regulated, not the broadband access itself. This means ISP's cant grow or expand without permission. They merge to cover already owned territories of other companies. Which the FCC decides on.
The ISP's aren't against us or anyone, it's the FCC that has restrictions on us.
We also found out that a city has access to 10Gbps, the city being Chattanooga, and the city had created a company named EPB. The EPB has told the FCC to lift expansion restrictions beyond their 600 square mile range (the size of the city) and the FCC has done nothing about it. Obama in presidency has congratulated Chattanooga for being the fastest in the nation and to encourage other companies to move forward. But that may mean that his net neutrality law prevented them from expanding, hindering the infrastructure.
This is a fight against how many people can access infrastructure, not actual access to content. To expand companies have to "merge", also under FCC's decision, but they can leave the merger and it's a never ending loop. The only ones who benefit are corporations with these restrictions as new ISP's can't be created or expand to new territories. ISP's want to get rid of the expansion problem. That's why they want to get rid of it being a "utility", because utilities can't expand without government approval.
Network neutrality, in this way, is bad because every company has to remain neutral to new infrastructure. It probably has nothing to do with content on the internet itself. So either you can see it as restriction to content (bad), or restriction to building new infrastructure, such as cell towers (bad).
Based on my research, I think that if the FCC losses this, they can no longer control how ISP's do infrastructure. Which is completely not even close to what we're hearing on the news.
Here's my report and the survey is also available at the bottom if you want to take it.
docs.google.com/document/d/1GkmrHrpUu47ap12wDy23OCngZcydbmY9jOBObT3QfTk/edit
