Neutral Broadband Access

Background: "Network neutrality" is an overly broad concept that some people equate with regulation of the Internet. "Neutral broadband access," on the other hand, simply means that incumbent owners of critical "last-mile" broadband access infrastructure should not block, degrade, or impair end user access to lawful applications, content, or services over the Internet. The FCC adopted Internet access principles in 2005 and ordered more specific non-discrimination rules for broadband access be applied to the post-merger AT&T/BellSouth in 2007 and beyond. These rules essentially mirror the status quo, so that residential, small business and rural end users are not disadvantaged or neglected in favor of higher volume customers. These rules merely prevent monopoly and duopoly abuses where users still have no alternatives for broadband access to the Internet.

CCIA's Position: The network neutrality debate demands a solution that can be accepted by all stakeholders. Regulation that constrains the free market dynamic of an industry, especially the Internet, should always be looked on with distrust. Regulations tend to expand; regulators may tend toward micromanagement. Yet targeted, restrained safeguards to preserve or enable connectivity are beneficial and often necessary where a competitive market is absent. Given the layered nature of the Internet and the need to protect innovation, the critical physical local access portion of transport infrastructure may be one such place. And hopefully, in the long run, widespread broadband competition will render neutrality rules unnecessary and this entire policy debate moot.

Congress and the FCC should not regulate Internet backbone networks or peering arrangements where there are no bottlenecks or market control problems, and regulation would only deter innovation and major infrastructure investments. Furthermore, U.S. broadband penetration is falling behind that of other sizable industrialized countries and too many of our homes and small businesses do not have high-speed Internet access. For those that have access, most must choose from only a single provider or two at best: the telephone company and the cable operator. Therefore, any regulation must provide cable and telecommunications companies with sufficient flexibility to devise efficient business models and non-discrimination rules can be subject to sunset provisions when the competitive local access situation demonstrably improves. In the meantime, protecting the "downstream" free market (websites, content, applications, services) should be the highest priority as this represents the inherent value of the Internet.