By refusing to include strict “network neutrality” provisions in a recently passed bill, the House of Representatives handed a victory to Internet delivery companies in their battle against Internet content companies. A similar battle is brewing in the Senate.

If you are not sure what network neutrality means, you are not alone: Experts disagree about the meaning of the concept and about its influence on the future of the Internet. Many advocates of network neutrality claim it would give consumers and Web sites nondiscriminatory and unimpeded access to each other. To opponents, network neutrality is a government solution in search of problem. The truth may well lie somewhere in between.

In the war over network neutrality, few observers are neutral. While no one agrees on definitions, practically everyone recognizes the battle lines that have divided much of Corporate America into mutually suspicious camps.

On one side are the Internet delivery companies. Principally, they are in the telephone and cable industries, but with allies in much of mainstream Corporate America. Such companies as AT&T, Verizon, and Comcast build communications networks and sell Internet services to American businesses and consumers. These businesses vigorously compete with one another for the lucrative Internet services market.

As part of that competition, these businesses plan to upgrade networks to offer much greater data speeds than are currently available. To recover investment costs, they are considering many options, including metering usage, vertically integrating into Internet services including search engines, charging online sites premiums to gain better access to customers, and charging additional fees to program suppliers, such as professional sports associations, for the highest quality distribution of high-definition video services. Whether these or other new business plans would help or harm the Internet is in the eye of the beholder. Some of these plans might be partly or entirely proscribed under various forms of proposed legislation.

The broader concept of network neutrality is affected by more than just Internet delivery companies. The Chinese government, for example, limits network neutrality when it restricts the Web sites that search engines such as Google and Yahoo can access in that country. Other governments, including America’s, may encroach on network neutrality by monitoring Internet traffic for law enforcement and national security purposes. In some instances, interfering with network neutrality can be unambiguously beneficial, such as when an Internet service provider blocks spam or virus-contaminated e-mails.

Network neutrality is ultimately important because it underlies the legal foundation for a rapidly growing part of our economy. American businesses and consumers spend billions of dollars each year for Internet access, an increasingly large share of all revenue for the telecommunications and cable industries.

Fees for Internet access services pale in comparison to the commercial transactions conducted on the Internet. The most recent government report calculates that in 2004 nearly $1 trillion in manufacturing shipments, or 23.6% of the total manufacturing, were attributable to electronic commerce. For the wholesale sector, more than $825 billion in sales were electronic commerce, or more than 17% of the total. Selected services, including airline ticket sales, had revenue of nearly $60 billion in sales.

The federal government estimates retail sales at only $70 billion in 2004, but this figure is only a fraction of actual online retail activity. For example, the more than $15 billion in 2004 American sales for eBay, the largest online retailer, are excluded. Regardless of how it is measured, electronic commerce, which may be directly affected by network neutrality, remains one of the fastest growing, most technologically innovative sectors of the American economy and one of our areas of competitive advantage in the international economy.

The Senate is more sympathetic than the House to the concept of network neutrality, but legislative time is running short for passage of a new law this year.Both the Internet delivery and content companies are engaged for battle. Regardless of congressional action, the network neutrality war will not end in 2006; these are but the opening salvos.

A former FCC commissioner, Mr. Furchtgott-Roth is president of Furchtgott-Roth Economic Enterprises. He can be reached at hfr@furchtgott-roth.com.