How neutral is the Internet right now? As we’ve pointed out on more than one occasion, the answer is: Not very. The Internet is a network of networks and technology tools at the input end of networks can result in a content owner getting priority over others on the Internet. It’s an expensive network of networks at that, funded by private investors and public agencies and requiring yet more investment for upkeep. In short, access may be equal, but the pipes aren’t. Illustrating the point last week, Nick Carr from the IT blog Rough Type, wrote a let’s-be-honest-with-ourselves post directed primarily at supporters of net neutrality:

Net neutrality exists in the abstract, in the realm of protocol. Because the content of any packet of data is invisible to the pipe carrying it, by protocological fiat, every packet is treated the same. If that was all there was to it - if theory and reality were one - then pro-neutrality would mean pro-competition. But it’s not all there is to it. In addition to the abstract realm of protocol, there’s the very real - very physical - realm of infrastructure. Regardless of protocol, superior infrastructure provides superior quality of service - ie, faster, more reliable transmission of data. … If net neutrality becomes law, it would prevent big companies from locking in an advantage at the protocological level - giving certain types of data privileged status - but it would allow big companies to lock in an advantage at the infrastructural level.

His chief examples are not new, either. Akamai is a company that operates servers around the world so the big companies that can afford their services can get their content delivered faster than the smaller companies that can’t afford this. When you consider that one of the main arguments in favor of net neutrality is to keep big companies from overpowering little companies, it’s clear that big companies already have this advantage. And yet new web companies succeed every day.