Network Neutrality

[Commentary] When the Federal Communications Commission voted December 14 to repeal the rules protecting a fast, fair, and open internet, the lobbyists for the internet service providers realized their long-envisioned strategy to gut the authority of the agency that since 1934 has been charged with overseeing the activities of the nation’s essential networks. The companies’ goal: to move regulatory jurisdiction from the Federal Communications Commission to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

[Commentary]  To taste a future without network neutrality, try browsing the web in Beijing. China’s internet, provided through telecom giants aligned with the Communist Party, is a digital dystopia, filtered by the vast censorship apparatus known as China’s Great Firewall. Some sites load with soul-withering slowness, or not at all. Others appear instantly. Content vanishes without warning or explanation. The culprit is rarely knowable. A faulty Wi-Fi router? A neighborhood power failure? Commercial sabotage? A clampdown on political dissent?

On February 26, 2015, the Federal Communications Commission acted decisively to protect the rights of internet users to employ any legal applications, content, devices, and services of their choosing on the broadband networks they rely on. Today, the FCC’s Republican majority abandons those protections.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai is facing an online backlash after joking about the implications of repealing net neutrality. Pai appeared in a video wielding a fidget spinner and performing the Harlem Shake just one day before a decisive vote is cast over whether to repeal net neutrality. The video appeared on conservative news site The Daily Caller on Wednesday, ahead of Thursday’s vote by the FCC that is expected to reverse the Obama-era “Open Internet Order” regulations. 

One reason why network neutrality is such a big deal is that competition among broadband providers is more limited in the United States than it perhaps has to be. Other countries have found a way to create competition: forcing big internet service providers to sell access to the “last mile” of their infrastructure to other internet service providers.

INCOMPAS is calling on Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai to pull the plug on the Dec. 14 net neutrality rule rollback vote after Politico reported that the FCC's CTO, Eric Burger, had issues with it. INCOMPAS members include Amazon, Google, Twitter and Facebook.

Netflix helped spark the debate over net neutrality three years ago by raising concerns about how its internet traffic was being handled. But as the US government prepares to repeal the rules, the video giant has been less vocal on a key issue. That is because its concerns over so-called interconnections—the places where web traffic is passed from one company to the other—have largely been addressed by commercial deals.

Rep Mike Doyle (D-PA), the Ranking Member on the House Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Communications and Technology, announced that he and 117 other Members of Congress had sent a letter to the Federal Communications Commission urging the Commissioners NOT to vote on FCC Chairman Ajit Pai’s “Restoring Internet Freedom Order” at the Commission’s scheduled meeting Dec 14. Congressman Doyle organized the letter to the FCC urging the Commission to delay its vote on the Restoring Internet Freedom Order – in other words, to not vote on the draft order tomorrow.

The Federal Communications Commission's own chief technology officer expressed concern Dec 13 about FCC Chairman Ajit Pai's plan to repeal the network neutrality rules, saying it could lead to practices that are "not in the public interest." In an internal e-mail to all of the FCC commissioner offices, CTO Eric Burger, who was appointed by Pai in October, said the No.

The Federal Communications Commission is expected to vote on Dec 14 to dismantle the so-called net neutrality rules, which prohibit internet service providers from blocking or charging websites for higher quality delivery to consumers. It would also dial back the government’s stance that broadband should be regulated like a utility.