Internet usage has increased over time as the number of users is increasing virtually every day describing its importance in the people?s life. They are supposed to get whatever they like and whatever they want regardless of any hindrance in the services given by the internet service providers. This was the how internet was expected to be used. The international ruling states that net neutrality should always be implemented no matter what and how things operate (Hansell 4). Users have the right to do what they like on the internet and service providers by no way have the authority to stop them or indulge them in any way to view what is better for their supporters. Network Neutrality is the rule by which the companies try to block away the website of their competitors or to provide unfavorable benefit to certain websites in order to make them more profitable and at the same time causing damages to the worth of others. In a broader sense of the definition, it can be defined as the internet services infrastructure that work on packet communication on first come first serve basis and must have same quality of service. Though in recent years Congress has passed a bill that allows the discrimination of the services which a user gets according to the charges he has paid (Farber and Katz 45). So if someone pays much amount to connect to the internet then he must get the access to the internet without any filtration or any other blockage of websites. It is like the telephone lines where the subscribers are not told that they can only access these numbers and not others. It is clear when the internet service provider companies use last mile medium to establish a communication between their customers and their equipments, they intentionally block services like P2P sharing because by this they not only control the illegal flow of the content but also make their network more efficient which doesn?t work better when the torrent sites or the sharing sites are working (Kahn and Feigenbaum 39). This though seems every efficient way of approaching but it is nothing real with the independent approach used by the internet creators who wanted users to be their own deciders of what they like and what is better for them regardless of the restrictions from the community or county. Over the passage of time the debates on the Network Neutrality have gained importance over time. The debate on this issue has started in 2000 as the issue became international. The followers of the Net Neutrality start their argument that these service providers create artificial scarcity showing websites out of service due to heavy traffic or other reasons and critically take away the loyal visitors of those sites to be transferred to the others which may be of their advertisers (Plunkett 76). Thus they typically try to make their users watch what is beneficial to them and not their users. Critics say this way they not only interfere with the users privacy because they get information about the behavior of their users by monitoring their activities and applying filtration provide them with what they like their users to view. This is against the privacy rules. With more emphasis on these issues these companies sometimes become overloaded with cache causing some technical problems. Even these technical problems are the responsible for the not opening of certain websites thus creating an uneven balance in the internet. The provision of the freedom is the biggest deal on the basis of which the internet was formed. But the opponents of Net Neutrality have other points in their minds where they want the things to happen according to the requirements of the community not the users. These opponents are in favor of the removing of the Net Neutrality because they can then stop the illegal usage of the content, they can stop the explicit websites to be watched more and increase in their Alexa Traffic Ranks, and can only follow the certain guideline rules of their governments better and safer environment at all the mediums of communications (Hompson 29). These people also have the stated if the Net Neutrality is removed they can easily emphasize the learning experience of the users which will help him identify what is good or bad for them. Various large internet companies have been able to generate lot more revenues only being online. Google is one of the giants in the internet today having the number one rank in the traffic rankings around the world because they present themselves everywhere differently. They have increased what is known as user experience by changing structural approach of how Google works. Google has been the great follower of the Net Neutrality and have always been a proponent of this issue (Nunziato 27). According to Google, the Net Neutrality is an important part of the internet usage and it has helped Google to develop into what it is now. It is all because of the competitions by which Google have reshaped their structure as they visitors wanted; they have changed their approach and reengineered their processing which made it possible for them to learn from the trends and produce what is known to be the best results possible. This is how Net Neutrality has made numerous of websites to become the giants. Yahoo is another giant which was previously highest visited website when Google took over their spot and pushed them to number two. Is this because of the reasons of the effective usage of Net Neutrality? The answer would be definitely yes and there is no way this could have been possible if Google didn?t have access to the people who were using certain service providers who wanted their customers to use any other search engine rather than Google because Google would have seemed offline at that time! The users are in control of the internet and they can get access to everything that is available on the internet (Wu 110). The development of the broadband internet in recent times has increased the number of incidents that are working against the Net Neutrality rule of internet. The problem is the power that is given to these service providers with no check and balance on their services not only in the United States but also in many developed and underdeveloped countries around the world. Sometimes these companies even use certain degraded equipments that would virtually kill the use of the P2P or other sharing services because that equipments doesn?t have the capability of carrying heavy traffic like this. Thus they are putting limits on their users of internet. The cable services are sometimes accused of limiting the user behaviors (Kelly 17). Even the big telecom services like AT&T and Verizon are found to be controlling the access to different websites according to their desires. Some websites are allowed to open fast and others slow because of the routing decisions taken in the routers and the configuration of their Domain Name System servers which can make the whole process to become slow or fast. The internet has become a very big market of the advertisers and therefore searching has become far more important. The free search concept has changed a little bit because now the good searching means good amount of unique visitors that will definitely affect your business. So the companies like AT&T and Verizon are subjected to be using policies that will slow down the access to mostly used search engines and will fast up the same queries for their search engines very quickly. Another important thing that happens because of the Network Neutrality is the guarantees that will make the users feel that they are able to connect to anything on the internet (Broache 8). The essence of this is lies in the word freedom. Today nothing seems to be free or unbiased. Internet must be provided free and has everything what people like. The biggest impact of the Net Neutrality is way the internet operates. The freeness of the internet allows the internet to grow beyond the boundaries that are set upon them without any reasons by the service providers. This provides a healthier environment for the companies to work in a better way and work according to the demands of the people and not with the ways the service providers want (Schor 18). The innovations in the technological approaches by the Google are not hidden from anyone as we all can see that they changed their approach according to the desires of their users. This was all possible due to the Net Neutrality because they were easily accessed by those who wanted to access internet and had no limitation on the content they wanted to view. The Net Neutrality therefore provides a better environment for new companies to go online and start their business regardless of any interpretations or the stereotyping that is provided by service providers. This triggers the innovative market approach and allows more companies to become online thus making the internet a free market having fair policies on doing business. The problem of Net Neutrality is stated before can also be caused due to the degraded equipment use. This can also be caused if the way of the transmission changes in the layers of the ISO Model. The ISO model describes a similar standard for the communication between two systems present on internet or Local Area Network environment (Phillips 4). So if there is a change of the way by which the transportation of the bits is changed by anyway, it is causing the Net Neutrality to fall below the required levels and is not desirable according to the internet standard organizations. Moreover, the problem of provisioning of the degraded services or filtration can also be reason because of the bribes or other reasons where the service companies make intrusion accordingly. The services therefore falls if they are not able to gain much respect and value as the internet companies strive for better free services. The proponents of Net Neutrality have many arguments which they state when the debate on this issue starts to propel. Net Neutrality is determined as the way of democracy where people have the right to do what they want and what they like and having no limitations can provide them a better user experience on the internet. The congress has been sometimes put up with the bill which requires that the companies must have the abilities and powers to control the contents of the internet someone views but the opponents of these issues always win the race. The Barak Obama has been great follower of the Net Neutrality and has been able to reject every bill that has been presented to him. The opponents of the Net Neutrality always come up with various arguments that could allow them to take control of the internet in the way they specifically require. The major groups of the opponents are the hardware companies and the service providers and they come up with virtually no reason as seen by the proponents. The internet cloud is based on the software working around and the whole environment is controlled on the basis of advertisement and searching. The hardware companies and service providers if given access to intrusion and content control of internet then there will be a whole new market of internet that will only be based upon the service providers and not the search engines like Google or Yahoo, thus, practically limiting the use of internet accordingly. Google therefore will not be allowed to open by certain service providers because they will have their own search engine which will only provide the websites which have paid them high so the concept of free searching is removed. Also the users of certain service providers will be limited to certain boundaries where the users can access certain things. The P2P sharing will be the first thing that will be finished off the face of internet because of the illegal sharing of the copyright content and these limitations will continue to take place as the time will pass and the priorities of the companies change according to their profits (Berners-Lee, 98). More importantly if we look into the issue more deeply we realize that this will be the end the internet. Internet is thought as the international network and with these implications set upon by the service providers there will be nothing international in it. There would be no possible communication between the two users of internet who have different service providers who have different objectives. So, clearly the nature of the proposal doesn?t even set upon to be clear. Somewhere, however, another notion also arise which states that the service providers provide different services to different types of customers and the differentiation is on the basis of the amounts that these service providers charge (Arshad 37). The proponents try to resolve the situation by stating that by these differences of bandwidths and speeds and therefore by prices the Net Neutrality is being damaged. They require same type of services, same bandwidths regardless of the prices. This has been overlooked by the government and therefore companies are able to charge their customers differently for the services they look for. However, any two customers paying same amount and getting same packages will get access to same kinds of services no matter what happens. The service provider is liable for the provision of these kinds of services anything going wrong in these situations is dealt with serious consequences from the regulation authorities (Crowcroft 121). The opponents of Net Neutrality describe the situation little bit strictly. The companies are of the view that they don?t get enough from their investments on the installations they do to provide better services to their customers. It is not viable if they are not able to charge more or the services they provide. Though this has been passed in the bill from the congress in which companies can charge more so this point has become out of question for now. The companies also look for the other companies that provide free services like Skype or any other bit torrent website. The problem for these companies to cope with the users of these services is that they consume lot of bandwidth and the quality of service protocols allow them to get priority in the transmission of data (Kessler 106). So they are free and they are fast as well and therefore they are always under discussion by the service providers who require charges from these Voice companies that they could use for the maintenance of their equipments etc. The bit torrent websites are another similar issue which consume lots of bandwidth due to the connection orientation these bit torrent clients do with the other users of the internet. Some of the opponents of Net Neutrality also state that the companies like Google have used these measures by buying high bandwidths for their users thus providing them better experiences than their customer websites, so if this is done against Google why people always have issues in these things. The copyright issue is present in the whole world where just with a click of the button music albums and movies are downloaded free of cost destroying all kinds of the copyrights. This problem has been the foundation of the non Neutral distribution of the internet. The service providers state that if they are allowed to filter the traffic and control the things that they are providing their customers than it is possible that to minimize these copyright issues. But this is not how the internet operates. The laws are present for all the people and these are applicable on those who don?t abide by these laws so it is the responsibility of the law enforcing authorities to catch these people and take actions accordingly and by no way this is the responsibility of the service providers to handle these situations on their own (Swanson 63). Government of United States has been able to make certain decisions that have been very good in the future regards of the Net Neutrality problem. The protocols are designed in order to provide better services to the customers on equal basis. The quality of service has increased as well over time and equality of the user rights has also gain importance in the same way (Sullivan 54). The fair queuing policy is also implemented by the government so that the precedence should be given on first come first serve basis and no user feel being left out because of the amount he pays or the content he watches. The problem has emerged as a very important in the recent times where the people on both sides have different sets of arguments that lead them to stay focus on their point of view. But in reality the situation seems to be pretty vague as the points forwarded by both of the companies have serious issues and consequences. The companies at one hand are in the favor of such things when this is happened with them and against if happens against them. The regulations of the government have helped much to resolve the problem but the content control power of the companies is still a very hot issue in the recent times because of the reason that internet has become far more important mode of communication and you can find everything on internet regardless of any rights that may be applicable on you (Kessler, 89). With all these things the debates in congress also take place often when the issues of national security rise which can be considered as propaganda to hype up the process and make it more critical than it really is. The laws of US are still in debate where the Net Neutrality is given to the users or not whereas in the European Union the law will be working in the favor of the Net Neutrality because of the policies of the equal rights.