In a 3-2 vote Tuesday, the FCC adopted net neutrality rules designed to defend consumers’ access to an open Internet.
First, CCIA commends the Chairman and Commissioners Clyburn and Copps for their more than a year of work on crafting Open Internet rules. Under their leadership, the FCC, after much deliberation, did what we expect of our public servants – they recognized a threat to the public and the vitality of the American economy and took action on behalf of the American people to defend against the emerging threat of online content blocking and discrimination by Internet Access Providers.
That said – while we recognize the hard work put in by the Commission and applaud this first step to guarantee that the Internet remains open and free – we largely view today’s vote as a missed opportunity to do more to protect the continued vigor of the Internet economy.
The net neutrality rules adopted today provide three basic rules for fixed (wired) broadband Internet service (Transparency, No Blocking, and No Unreasonable Discrimination) and two rules for wireless service (Transparency and No Blocking). We are particularly happy that in the past weeks the Chairman’s proposed rules were tweaked to close loopholes, increase transparency, and provide an expedited process for consumers to notify the FCC of discrimination by IAPs.
However, these changes do not go far enough. In order to truly protect consumers and protect the economic growth that depends on an open Internet, it was obligatory that the FCC classify broadband Internet access as a telecommunications service; here the FCC fell short. Unfortunately, as pointed out by Commissioners Atwell Baker, Copps, and McDowell, that continuing to classify broadband Internet access under Title I of the Telecommunications Act leaves this rule and enforcement actions taken under its authority on weak legal footing.
Commissioner Copps said it best in his statement that between 2001 and 2009, “the Commission stopped treating advanced telecommunications as telecommunications….” Indeed, the Internet is the most impressive and complex telecommunications delivery service ever devised. Unfortunately, the FCC continues to abdicate its responsibility in protecting consumers and content providers from discrimination by misclassifying IAPs as information service providers rather than telecommunications service providers. The FCC should address this.
Commissioners Atwell Baker and McDowell expressed doubt about the need to preserve consumers’ access to an open Internet, insisting there isn’t a problem yet.
We reject the premise that net neutrality rules address problems that have not arisen. Anyone who has followed Comcast’s behavior with regard to BitTorrent and Level 3 knows that IAPs already engage in discrimination and paid prioritization. Such actions will only increase and become entrenched business practices without strong rules and enforcement from the FCC.
The position of Commissioners Atwell Baker and McDowell is a familiar refrain from the Bush Era – government shouldn’t think about how to tackle a problem until it grows worse. Such rationale has recently proven disastrous. Who can forget the ad hoc responses to the financial crisis, Hurricane Katrina, and the BP oil spill? The American economy and the Gulf Coast are still reeling from decades of government failure to prepare to deal with known threats, yet Commissioners Atwell Baker and McDowell are prepared to rely on the same logic that has failed the American people time and again. We need strong rules now to preserve the historically neutral Internet and safeguard it from known threats.
It is imperative the FCC and other stakeholders view today’s vote as a beginning, not an end, of efforts to guarantee an open Internet. The FCC must be diligent in continuing to engage on this issue by ensuring strong enforcement of these rules through reporting discrimination by IAPs.
The FCC and stakeholders must monitor the consequences of unequal treatment of wireless broadband services and take swift action to guarantee that inequality and favoritism amongst content and services do not become acceptable and enshrined business practices by wireless IAPs.
Finally, the FCC, consumers, and businesses have to continue this dialogue to make certain consumers maintain control of their online experience and that entrepreneurs are free to develop the content and services demanded by consumers rather than incumbent IAPs. To that end we are pleased to see that the Commission’s Reclassification docket remains open and we look forward to working with the Commissioners to that end moving forward.
