By: MarkJ - 16 February, 2010 (3:04 PM) - Score: 2799 - Fixed Line Broadband

Network Neutrality (Net Neutrality), which advocates no restrictions to Internet content, sites, or platforms by Internet access providers, is a touchy subject even at the best of times and it could be about to get worse if UK broadband ISPs follow Telefónica's ambition to charge Internet search engines for using their networks.

Net Neutrality is certainly not a new problem for UK ISPs and in fact many already adopt Traffic Management systems that throttle bandwidth to specific services (e.g. P2P, Online Gaming etc.). Since late 2007 the bulk of concern was centred around online video services, such as the BBC's iPlayer, with some operators (e.g. BT Retail) openly calling for content owners to "[pay] their fair share" (here).

The long standing debate heated up again earlier this month when César Alierta, president of the Spanish telecommunications company Telefónica (owner of O2 UK), took it to the next level and shocked many observers by announcing plans to make Internet search engines pay for using the operators network. Video delivery is one thing, but search engines?


That's not unlike one of our readers complaining that ISPreview should pay to cover his or her subscription costs because the website consumes bandwidth when it’s viewed. The idea that it is wrong for search engines to make money from the Internet without giving anything back to ISPs appears nonsensical and perhaps even absurd.

Without search engines and online content ISPs would not exist, they'd instead be closed networks akin to little more than advertising billboards for highly pre-selected content (hmm). We wonder how popular ISPs would become if customers were clearly informed about any content restrictions prior to signup. It's doubtful anybody would be pleased to join a service that loudly proclaimed "we restrict access to Google" etc.

Suffice to say that Google and Internet content in general must already pay to exist. Hosting and server fees cost money too and surely it's only right that consumers should pay for what they consume via broadband providers too (this is the current model), just like any utility service (gas, electric, water etc.). However there are those, most often the big players, who feel this model needs to change.

The New Model

Cameron Rejali, Managing Director of Products at BT Wholesale, last year described this situation as an attempt to solve the "grumpiness triangle". ISPs are grumpy because online video growth increases their backhaul costs and so they restrict traffic, which makes users grumpy because it affects what they like to view and that in turn irritates content producers.

The solution should be simple; ISPs spend more on their services and raise the cost to consumers as appropriate. The problem here is, once again, with a highly competitive broadband market where every big ISP is scrambling to under-cut the other with lower pricing and often misleading promotions of "unlimited" services. Consumers are now use to a market where realistic prices appear to be going out of fashion.

Instead some of the largest providers are seeking new models, embodied by specialised Content Delivery Network's (CDN) and the divorce of revenue from traffic. In other words, they'd rather charge those who make content for the Internet than their customers for viewing it.

To be fair nobody could blame them for trying to save end-users some cash but is the result, a more restricted Internet experience, really worth it? Do we really want a society that forces innovation, freedom and open access out of the window and gives preference to big corporations? The possibility that ordinary websites like ours might one day have to pay ISPs in order to be displayed is disturbing and now a very real possibility.

Will UK Broadband ISPs Charge Search Engines?

So down to the crux of it, what will UK ISPs do? Naturally we chased up our usual contacts with broadband providers that account for most of the market; TalkTalk , BT , Virgin Media and O2 UK. The response was one of near total silence, almost nobody wanted to talk or admit that this was a very real possibility. Only Virgin Media was brave enough to openly pass comment.


BT, like TalkTalk, chose not to comment but did suggest that revenue and traffic [costs] had indeed become detached, so the current model needs rethinking - it looks like Telefonica are doing that rethinking out loud. We don't agree but as Virgin Media correctly points out, it's one for debate. But where is this debate going to come from? The government? Doubtful, right now they only protect businesses. Consumer groups? None of them seem to be very aware of it.

Happily many smaller ISPs are less likely to follow suit because most simply wouldn't have the clout to make such demands upon content giants and many wouldn’t want to, which could ironically one day end up working in their favour as a new selling point.

It is also worth considering that search engines, Google in particular, are now much more than big searchable index's for the Internet. Google gets almost all its cash from advertising and recently it's even begun to enter the telecoms market with VoIP and fibre optic broadband services. Suffice to say, some ISPs might perceive Google as a threat.

There is one other aspect of this debate to consider. How might it impact the current problem of illegal file sharing? Think about it. If ISPs start controlling the flow of content too much then any defence of being "mere conduits" for access to the Internet might end up holding about as much water as a bucket full of holes.