Net Neutrality: Millions of people today protested against network neutrality and an open internet. The "Battle for the Network" or Battle for the Net, supported by major technology companies like Amazon, Google and Netflix, and hopes to stop an imminent abolition of the existing network neutrality rules.
The debate began ten years ago when some torrent users could not download their favorite TV shows, but today it does not seem to be a fight for pirates only today. 
Net Neutrality Let's see what happened from the beginning:
Today, millions of people are protesting the FCC's plan to roll back net neutrality rules enacted by former Gov. Obama.
In this "battle for the Internet", or Battle for the Net, many prominent activist groups and companies joined, such as Amazon, BitTorrent, dropbox, Netflix and even Pornhub.
Under current network neutrality rules, there is a clear standard that prevents ISPs from blocking, restricting, and prioritizing "legal" traffic.
If the existing network neutrality rules disappear, some fear that the restriction and "quick lines" for some services will become commonplace.
Historically, there is a strong link between network neutrality and piracy. The first samples of what followed first appeared on 2007 when Comcast began to slow traffic for BitTorrent in an effort to ease the load on its network.
When this informal practice was exposed, it sparked the first widespread debate about net neutrality. The first discussion was the setup for the Open Internet FCC order released three years later.
The Open Internet Order was the foundation of the Net Neutrality rules issued by the FCN 2015. The major change compared to the previous regulations was that Internet service providers could be regulatory bodies under the Title II.
So under the regulation, ISPs will be allowed to block any illegal traffic, including tradingof content that infringes copyright.
Net Neutrality What is to come if…
In fact, FCC's new Internet neutrality regulation states the following:
"Nothing will prevent a reasonable effort by a broadband Internet service provider to address copyright infringement or other illegal activity."
The main reason for the adoption of the above regulation by the FCC is that the copyright infringement affects the US economy, so Internet providers are free to take the appropriate measures if they need to intervene. This includes the voluntary censorship of pirate websites, which MPAA and RIAA want and are constantly pressing for.
"For example, the no-blocking regulation should not end any ban on copyright protection, which has a negative effect on the economy, nor should it protect child pornography. "We reiterate that our rules do not alter copyright laws and are not intended to prohibit or discourage voluntary practices to address or mitigate copyright infringement," the FCC said.
This gives ISPs a lot of room to maneuver. Internet service providers could block access to The Pirate Bay and other pirate sites websites completely voluntarily, for example. Banning BitTorrent traffic globally is also an option, as long as it's accompanied by a good "better network management" excuse.
The worrying part is that ISPs themselves will be able to decide which traffic or what websites are illegal. This could potentially lead to excessive blocking. At present, there is no indication that we will see this, but the net neutrality rules do not prevent companies from doing so.
What must be clear is that the fight for net neutrality is no longer a fight for pirates.
Today's protest is reminiscent of the great "Internet blackout" uprising over the anti-piracy law SOUP.
