When dealing with any form of network, be it telephone service, cable television or the Internet, there is often a business philosophy called network neutrality at work. When dealing specifically with Internet issues, the term is usually shortened to net neutrality, but the basic principles are still the same. Net neutrality refers to the non-discriminatory nature of essential Internet components such as servers, ISPs and transmission lines. In the eyes of an idealized Internet, all users have the right to send and receive packets of information equally. The principle of net neutrality makes this possible.

At the present time, there is no actual law in the United States that enforces net neutrality, but an informal arrangement has been in place for many years. Net neutrality essentially levels the playing field for commercial websites, ensuring that a small online bookstore can still receive visitors, even if sites such as Amazon.com or Barnes&Noble.com are statistically more popular. Under the philosophy of net neutrality, individual Internet service providers (ISPs), search engines and major online services like Yahoo, America Online (AOL) or Google cannot restrict or filter a user's access to rival companies. AOL, for example, cannot prevent one of its subscribers from receiving email from Yahoo accounts.

Supporters of net neutrality suggest that non-profit government control over the Internet would prevent larger commercial websites from completely dominating the marketplace. A government agency similar to the current Federal Communications Commission (FCC) would oversee the basic network to prevent the formation of 'robber barons', companies who could possibly choke off competition by controlling key points on the Internet transmission network. Countries such as Japan already have Internet access laws based on the principle of net neutrality. Eventually, most countries with Internet access may have to implement laws to protect the current net neutrality concept.

Opponents of net neutrality include cable television companies, major Internet service providers and large commercial websites. They suggest that net neutrality is an unrealistic goal, since other network systems are already controlled by their largest contributors and are still able to function fairly. Government control over the Internet's basic network, opponents argue, would only lead to increased censorship and invasion of privacy. Website owners shouldn't be legally forced to receive or transmit information from competitors or other websites they find objectionable. This has already happened in isolated incidents.

Recently, there have been several attempts to form a national net neutrality law, but as of this date the United States still has not created a legally binding document. There are concerns that without such federal protection, net neutrality could be replaced with a different business model - survival of the fittest.