On Jan. 14, a 2-1 ruling was handed down by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that now allows internet-service providers to charge for particular data usage. A decision had already been made on the topic in 2010, but it was appealed by Verizon.

Within its original decision, the court allowed the Federal Communications Commission to keep its rules regarding net neutrality on legal principle. The last major piece of internet law was the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and it gave the FCC the authority to regulate Internet service providers as either telecommunications services, which transmit data, or information services, which process data. According to the courts, broadband providers are not “common carriers,” like telephone companies, and, as such, cannot be regulated under that law.

The new ruling stated that the FCC had no control over net neutrality with the new definitions the FCC itself brought to the table.

Violating network neutrality is a real and serious problem. Corporations now have the right to discriminate against internet traffic in ways that can stifle innovation and slow down the talking dog videos the Internet is known for.

Let’s face it: the restriction of any information is a problem when you think about how the internet is supposed to be a free medium for everyone to express themselves through cats, memes and that one website we already have an excuse for being on (“What? These aren’t sporting goods!”). But what the internet gives us, more than cats and shame, is creativity.

What is net neutrality?

The word people are throwing around is net neutrality. Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers are not legally allowed to discriminate between different kinds of online content or applications.

For example, I can have several applications on different devices running such as Twitter and email on my phone, and YouTube and Grooveshark on my computer. My Internet service provider doesn’t make me pay extra for using an app on my phone while I am doing something on my Xbox; instead they me pay one monthly fee for everything. Prior to Jan. 14, my ISP could not legally make me pay more than that one monthly fee.

No longer will companies necessarily be reprimanded if they interfere with things such as Internet connectivity. Some might shutter and remember the 2007 fiasco when Comcast throttled—purposely slowed down a user’s Internet—BitTorrent traffic. At that time, that kind of conduct was illegal.

Without net neutrality, your ISPs can demand more money without improving your bandwidth, and they can also discriminate against content they dislike.

Competition is good because it promotes ingenuity, but if companies can promote only who and what they want to promote, and the up-and-comers don’t have the pocket change to start their website, they have virtually no chance.

Of course, corporations are attempting to calm their consumers. The instigator, Verizon, stated that the “decision will not change consumers” ability to access and use the Internet as they do now.

AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson told the public that his company is “committed to keeping the Internet open.”

A Comcast spokesperson stated that they intend to remain committed to adhere to the net neutrality rules until 2018.

Time Warner Cable released the statement that it has been “committed to providing its customers the best service possible, including unfettered access to the web content and services of their choice. This commitment, which long precedes the FCC rules, will not be affected by today’s court decision.”

There is only one adequate way to describe what these corporations are doing: #trolololing.

What Will This Look Like?

The ISPs have essentially said that they would like to make a “tiered” Internet. A tiered service structure parades itself in an alluring name like bundle. This means that you pay increasingly high prices depending on which tier you pick. So, if you pay the most amount of money, your service will run fast; if you don’t, people will cry and start keeping a box of bubble wrap by the computer to kill time while their precious cat video loads on YouTube.

Does anyone remember cable? Me neither. Thankfully, Wikipedia exists and told me it was a perfect example of what our internet future probably holds. Apparently, cable TV is failing because of bundling channels—if you pay more, you get exclusive channels.

I care about “Game of Thrones” a healthily obsessive amount, but I don’t watch it on HBO due to the cost. Most people must feel the reasonableness of Netflix, because it has become a broadcasting giant, and it only costs $7.99 a month.

Who Cares?

About one-third of internet traffic every night is from Netflix and this means that ISPs will be coming for Netflix first. While Netflix left the US moms safely watching Downton Abbey, it brought a few statements to the press.

The death of net neutrality means a domestic ISP can now “legally impede the video streams that members request from Netflix, degrading the experience we jointly provide.” Obviously, the motivation would most likely be “to get Netflix to pay fees to stop this degradation.”

Netflix stated that they did not believe this would become a problem because, if it did, “we would vigorously protest and encourage our members to demand the open Internet they are paying their ISP to deliver.”

Nobody puts Netflix in the corner. Nobody.

Time for Action

Large companies like money. They can now show you how much they like money by charging you for access to the network, and again for the things you do while online. I think we took too much for granted.

We got used to watching online videos, listening to podcasts, video chatting and instant messaging with no effort. But I also don’t think that should be taken away. Individuals can only do so much.

The White House has said that President Barack Obama is “committed to an open Internet,” and has promised that he will work with the FCC to Congress to keep it open. But with Congress at its lowest approval ratings in history and its lack of actually trying to solve America’s problems, it seems like we may be facing changes to the Internet.

Awareness is a step, not the step. I think that the only way to make a difference is to take action. Everyone remembers SOPA and PIPA— the day most of the web stood still.

Action requires action. We need big names like Netflix and Google to stand up and protect the Internet.