On Net Neutrality

by

fcc-questions-key-aspects-of-google-and-verizon-s-net-neutrality-proposal-87dfd7e825

Here is a quick primer, in Q&A format, on Net Neutrality.

What is Net Neutrality?

Net Neutrality is the principle that Internet Service Providers should—

  • Enable access to all content and applications regardless of the source, and without favoring or blocking particular products or websites.
  • Give consumers access to all legal content and applications on an equal basis—i.e. no bandwidth throttling on competing content, or increased bandwidth on non-competing content.

What are the key points in the discussion?

  • In general, most everyone favors the Net Neutrality principle.
  • The issue is, are you for or against enacting laws to ENSURE Net Neutrality.
  • In addition to providing Internet access (Time Warner, Cox, ATT&U-verse, etc.), many ISPs provide value-added services that compete with content providers
  • Those who favor legislation say we need laws to prevent these companies from blocking or throttling back competitor content.
  • Those who favor a hands-off approach believe that competition alone will prevent ISPs from blocking or throttling back competitor content.
  • The “hands off” folks say innovation will be stymied if legislation puts restraints on ISPs. Those who favor legislation disagree.

What’s the difference between an ISP and a content provider?

  • An ISP is a company that provides you with access to the Internet, like AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, Cox and Time Warner Cable.
  • Content providers include companies like Netflix and Amazon that create and/or distribute videos and programs.
  • Sometimes an ISP is also a content provider. For instance, Comcast owns NBCUniversal and delivers TV shows and movies through its Xfinity Internet service.

What are the arguments?

  • Those who favor federal laws to protect Net Neutrality say that laws are needed to prohibit ISPs from using or abusing their position in the supply chain to block or allow certain websites and associated content.
  •  Those who favor leaving things as they are say that healthy competition among ISPs will have a natural regulating effect, and that the situation many people fear will not come to fruition.
  • Some argue that enacting laws to protect Net Neutrality would discourage innovation; others argue that innovation would not be impacted.
  • Some argue that the Hands Off approach is what we have today and that it works just fine: why fix what isn’t broken.

Who supports laws protecting Net Neutrality?

  • Content providers, Apple and Google among them, support Net Neutrality and the rules that were passed recently (March 2015) by the FCC. They say consumers are already paying for connectivity, and they deserve to get a quality experience.
  • Most average users support Net Neutrality and some level of regulation to ensure an open Internet

Who is against Net Neutrality laws and regulations?

  • More than two-dozen broadband companies, including AT&T, Comcast, Cox and Verizon, voiced concerns that the new rules are too heavy-handed and could stifle investment and innovation.

What is the current situation?

  • The FCC in March published Net Neutrality regulations. The previous set was tossed out by a federal court in January 2014. Since then, the FCC had no authority to protect an open Internet.
  • The rules ban blocking and throttling of content and prohibit ISPs from charging content providers to set up fast lanes, a practice known as paid prioritization.
  • The FCC can take action when a practice unreasonably interferes with consumers. The plan does not include rate regulations, unbundling or new tariffs or taxes.

What’s next?

The FCC regulations will be published soon in the Federal Register and will become effective 60 days after publication. Opponents have indicated they plan to challenge the new rules in court. Some Republicans in Congress are pushing open-Internet legislation that would supersede the FCC rules.

What positions are people taking?

  • Regulate—This would prohibit ISPs from charging content providers for speedier delivery of their content on “fast lanes” and deliberately slowing the content from content providers that may compete with ISPs. Some consider this an overreach.
  • Hands Off—Allow free market competition to flourish. This discourages ISPs from blocking content or manipulating speeds. Some consider this as not enough.
  • Hybrid—Some level of regulation will be needed to protect consumers, businesses, and startups. But equally as important, legislation should encourage competition, not stifle it.

What is my position on the issue?

I believe that the best solution is a hybrid solution in which one should take a hands-off approach and let competition help ensure an open Internet while making sure—via legislative means—that consumers, businesses, and innovators have protections or legal recourse if they are negatively impacted by unfair competitive practices or abuse of power by ISPs.

The FCC ruling is a start. We’ll know more as situations and circumstances arise and pose challenges. In addition, because of jurisdictional questions posed by the FTC regarding the enforcement of Internet privacy regulations, there is no question Congress will need to get involved.

Sources: Wikipedia, USA Today, CNET, Forbes