What is net neutrality, and what does it actually require?
The principle that networks should carry all traffic equally, without favouring or discriminating between sources, destinations or applications on commercial grounds.
What it prohibits, specifically:
Blocking lawful content, applications or services.
Throttling particular services — deliberately slowing a competitor's video platform, for instance.
Paid prioritisation — charging a content provider for faster delivery, creating "fast lanes".
What it does not prohibit. This is where discussion frequently goes wrong:
Reasonable traffic management. Networks may manage congestion, prioritise by traffic class — treating latency-sensitive voice differently from bulk downloads — and act against attacks. The distinction is between technical management applied neutrally and commercial discrimination between providers of the same type of service.
Different speed tiers for consumers, which are unaffected.
Specialised services such as some managed voice or medical applications, subject to conditions.
The arguments for it. The internet's generativity came from its permissionless character — a new service could reach users without negotiating with every network. Paid prioritisation advantages incumbents who can afford it and raises a barrier to new entrants. It also prevents a network that owns content from disadvantaging competing content, a genuine conflict of interest where ISPs own media businesses.
The arguments against. That prioritisation would fund investment; that some applications genuinely benefit from differentiated handling; and that the rules address a problem that has occurred rarely.
Zero-rating is the most contested area — exempting particular services from data caps. It is not blocking or throttling, and it plainly advantages the zero-rated service. Regulators have reached different conclusions, and EU-level rulings have found some zero-rating arrangements incompatible with the regulation.
The regulatory position varies. The EU has open internet rules in regulation; the UK retained equivalent rules after leaving the EU; the US position has reversed repeatedly with changes of administration and remains contested.
Why it surfaces during disputes. Peering disputes have produced visible congestion, and whether that counts as discrimination is genuinely arguable, since it occurs at network interconnection rather than in traffic handling.