FCC votes to pursue US net neutrality

Robert Hallock (Thrax) The FCC has voted to move ahead with Network Neutrality in the United States.

October 22, 2009 1:53 PM ET in News, , ,

fcc_logoFresh off the voting block, the FCC has decided to move forward (PDF) with plans to pursue net neutrality in the United States.

The Commission has published a series of draft rules, which it is now petitioning the public to comment on. The rules apply to all providers of broadband Internet service, but wireless carriers are not yet included under that definition.

“To that end, the Notice seeks comment on how, in what time frames or phases, and to what extent the principles should apply to non-wireline forms of broadband Internet access, including mobile wireless,” the FCC said.

For now, providers which do fit the FCC’s definition of broadband service providers:

  • Would not be allowed to prevent any of its users from sending or receiving the lawful content of the user’s choice over the Internet;
  • Would not be allowed to prevent any of its users from running the lawful applications or using the lawful services of the user’s choice;
  • Would not be allowed to prevent any of its users from connecting to and using on its network the user’s choice of lawful devices that do not harm the network;
  • Would not be allowed to deprive any of its users of the user’s entitlement to competition among network providers, application providers, service providers, and content providers;
  • Would be required to treat lawful content, applications, and services in a nondiscriminatory manner; and
  • Would be required to disclose such information concerning network management and other practices as is reasonably required for users and content, application, and service providers to enjoy the protections specified in this rulemaking.

But as with any legislation, there is also a list of exceptions that the FCC omits from the neutrality rules. The most contentious of the lot is a vague statement on congestion management.

“Draft rules would permit broadband Internet access service providers to engage in reasonable network management, including but not limited to reasonable practices to reduce or mitigate the effects of network congestion,” the FCC said in their prepared statement.

What steps ISPs will assume are “reasonable practices” are not likely to fall in line with what consumers expect of a free and open Internet. Meanwhile, other exceptions include:

  • Blocking harmful traffic like spam and viruses.
  • Blocking the unlawful transfer of content (piracy).
  • Blocking the transfer of unlawful content (child pornography).

In all, the two Republican commissioners expressed partial dissent over the proposal. This is not unsurprising given the Republican party’s current stance in relation to the telecom industry. The three Democrats, including FCC Chairman Genachowski, were fully in favor of pursuing the net neutrality principles.

Commissioner Michael J. Copps was particularly critical of the “radioactive rhetoric” when voicing his opinion, saying opponents were “Chicken Littles running around proclaiming the sky’s falling.”

Copps refers to neutrality opposition’s scare tactics which have said that net neutrality would prevent E911 calls, impede emergency services, neuter homeland security efforts and rob an ISP of the right to alleviate network congestion. The FCC has preempted all of those concerns and doubts as a part of its official statement.

“Nothing in the draft rules supersedes any obligation a broadband Internet access service provider may have — or limits its ability — to deliver emergency communications, or to address the needs of law enforcement, public safety, or national or homeland security authorities, consistent with applicable law,” they said.

Lastly, the Commission is seeking input on the provision of “specialized” services that would be given priority on the Internet. These services might include VoIP, eLearning, smart grids, and telemedicine or enterprise business services. The FCC believes that preferential treatment of the protocols used by these technologies might compel additional broadband investment.

In all, comments on the preliminary rules are due by January 2010, and it is believed that the FCC will move forward with an official vote by the summer months.

6 Comments:

  1. This isn't looking as great as it originally sounded.

  2. The wording of this bill and the exceptions are so vague, I don't know how the FCC plans to enforce any aspects of it. This is just political grandstanding. The Democrats are trying to show constituents that they did something to promote net neutrality, but they're still bowing down to the corporate lobbyists. I loathe politics.

  3. BTW, whatever happened to JUSTICE? I heard that the President squashed it just before announcing that he wanted to renew the Patriot Act.

    It just seems like everything we supposedly voted for is dead in the wind, as far as any meaningful Telecom reform goes.

  4. Wolvenmoon

    Vague and with no bite. All this does is make politicians look good. To my understanding ISPs are still allowed to throttle bittorrent ("Excessive amount of connections"), etc. We'll probably see encrypted content exempted ( Tor, HTTPS ) from net neutrality measures as a means to 'combat piracy' ( read 'invade privacy' )

    There will be no network neutrality until the majority of internet traffic is anonymized ( My spellchecker doesn't have that word ). Solution: Join an anonymizing network and contribute resources. When the majority of legal and illegal internet traffic is sent through untraceable networks, we may have a sudden realization that 'oh, maybe we should remove regulations before we can't catch dangerous criminals because legitimate consumers decided to protect themselves from unreasonable invasion of their privacy'

  5. They are going to have to have better rules if they expect to make a difference.

  6. Way to half ass it guys.

Troll-free since 2003 ®