How so?

The net is already neutral. The FCC can't implement net neutrality on ISPs. What the FCC is considering, is allowing ISPs to do away with net neutrality. This petition is trying to stop that.

My understanding is that the Internet is not neutral. Different isp's offer different speed options for home users. A neutral affect would be where everyone would run at a slower more evenly distributed bandwidth. Isp's would then be regulated and restricted to giving out specific bandwidth streams, thus creating data caps for us. It's like the data plan on your cell phone. Youre allotted a certain amount per month, if you go over, you get wacked with a fee. So, websites, gaming corporation and publishers will have to restrict content so that they fit between these guidelines. Please correct me if I'm wrong tho. Thanks you, for the feedback!

[quote]My understanding is that the Internet is not neutral. Different isp's offer different speed options for home users. A neutral affect would be where everyone would run at a slower more evenly distributed bandwidth.[/quote]Net neutrality is about content producers' visibility, not consumers' bandwidth. Say I have a website, offering cheap phones that work on any network. AT&T may not like this, because they want people to buy their phones, not mine. In a Net Neutral environment, AT&T cannot block or otherwise impede their internet subscribers from accessing my site. In a non net neutral environment, AT&T could limit their customers from accessing my site, unless I paid a premium to them.

True, but I'm saying speeds and content availability is a result to what you're describing. I'm saying that's what we will see on our end as consumers. But you're right it's the restrictions of certain content that will start the inevitable landslide. Should have added that, my bad.

In any case, regardless of what net neutrality entails, you indicated that this petition was against net neutrality, when in fact, this petition is for net neutrality.