The politically charged debate over Net neutrality has now officially been opened for public debate at the Federal Communications Commision.
On Thursday, the FCC voted 3 to 2 to open Chairman Tom Wheeler's proposal up for public comment. Wheeler's proposal, which was leaked last month and has ignited a firestorm of protest among consumer advocates, has been revised since its original inception and will officially start the public debate on reinstating rules to protect the open Internet, which were thrown out by a federal appeals court in January.
Wheeler, who has been criticized for capitulating to big broadband companies by allowing a so-called fast lane for priority traffic on the Internet as part of his proposal, vehemently defended his proposal and tried once again to set the record straight on what the proposal will and will not do. And he made a personal appeal stating that as an entrepreneur and venture capitalist he knew how it felt to be excluded from closed networks.
'I will not allow the national asset of an open Internet to be compromised,' he said. 'I understand this issue in my bones. I've got scars from when my companies were denied access in the pre-Internet days.'
He emphasized once again that the Internet would not be allowed to be divided into the have and have nots.
So far only the FCC commissioners and the staff at the FCC have actually read the proposal. And it will still be a few days before the order is made available to the public.
While the two Democratic commissioners Mignon Clyburn and Jessica Rosenworcel each supported the item, they admitted that they weren't entirely happy with the firestorm that erupted around the Chairman's approach.
Commissioner Rosenworcel said she would have done things differently. Last week, Rosenworcel had asked the Chairman to delay the vote to open the proposal up to the public.
'I support Net neutrality,' she said in her statement. 'But I believe the process is flawed. I would have preferred a delay. I think we moved too fast.'
During the meeting, Republican Commissioners Ajit Pai and Michael O'Reilly, who not surprisingly each voted against the order, expressed their concerns with respect to the proposal.
Commissioner O'Reilly, the newest member of the commission, said he doesn't think the FCC has the authority to impose these rules.
'The premise for imposing Net neutrality rules is fundamentally flawed and rests on a faulty foundation of make-believe statutory authority,' he said. 'I have serious concerns that this ill-advised item will create damaging uncertainty and head the Commission down a slippery slope of regulation.'
And Commissioner Pai said that while he believes in ensuring an open Internet, he thinks it is not the FCC's place to impose such regulation. Instead, he said the FCC should wait for Congress to take action, especially since the FCC's previous two attempts to enact regulation have not stood up to two previous court challenges.
He echoed Democratic commissioner Rosenworcel's sentiments that a vote on the proposal was premature.
FCC Net neutrality rule making: take two
This isn't the FCC's first time adopting rules to protect the open Internet. In 2010, the FCC adopted regulation that was later challenged in court by Verizon. The FCC lost the lawsuit, and the rules, which many in the digital advocacy world believed were too weak anyway, were thrown out on a legal technicality.
The new rules proposed by Chairman Wheeler are a way to quickly get Net neutrality protections in place since currently no protections are in place to protect openness on the Internet.
The good news for the FCC is that even though the court threw out its original rules on a legal technicality, it agreed with the agency that some regulation is needed to deter broadband providers who might otherwise be tempted to abuse their control of the last mile Internet network.
Meanwhile, advocates, who were disappointed in the FCC's previous attempt to enact Net neutrality protections, have viewed the FCC's legal loss as an opportunity for the FCC to adopt even stronger regulation to protect the Internet. Specifically, they want the FCC to reclassify broadband as a Title II service under the Telecommunications Act, which they believe will give the FCC authority to regulate these networks like a utility.
Broadband providers say such a move would be a mistake. They argue changing the classification of broadband would subject their networks to regulation similar to the old telephone network, which they claim would stifle innovation. Major companies, which have already signed their own letter to the FCC, are already preparing to mount a massive lobbying campaign and will surely go back to court if reclassification is adopted.
What about the 'fast lane?'
But the real issue that has stoked the ire of politicians, large technology companies, and even some celebrities is not just the legal intricacies of this debate, but the threat that under the newly proposed rules, broadband providers could charge content companies a fee for priority access to the network. For instance, Netflix or Amazon could pay extra to ensure their traffic is delivered more expeditiously to ensure a better quality of service.
This notion of a so-called Internet 'fast lane' is not a new concern with regard to FCC Net neutrality regulation. Open Internet proponents were worried that the 2010 rules might also allow for such services. But because the prospect of 'commercial services' were highlighted more in the original leaked Wheeler proposal or perhaps because digital advocates focused on it more as a talking point, it has become a lightning rod for this issue, attracting the attention of not only large technology companies like Google, Facebook, and Amazon, but also celebrities, including musicians Eddie Vedder and Michael Stipe, as well as director Oliver Stone, and actor Mark Ruffalo, who have signed a letter sent to the FCC this week in support of stronger Net neutrality regulation.
The public outcry has also gotten the attention of congressional leaders, too. And US senators Al Franken (D-Minn.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), along with nine of their colleagues also sent a letter the FCC demanding stronger rules to ensure there is no Internet fast lane.
Chairman Wheeler has responded to the political and public pressure and on Monday he revised his proposal to ask in more detail whether commercial priority services should even be allowed. He also included questions about whether or not the FCC should reclassify broadband as a Title II service in order to implement new rules. And he has allowed a second proposal drafted by Mozilla to be considered for comments alongside his own proposal. The Mozilla proposal also suggests reclassification, but it includes a novel approach for reaching that goal.
The full proposal will be published in the Federal Register within a few days. Then a typical FCC Notice of Proposed Rule Making or NPRM is typically open for public comment for 60 days. After that period, it is kept open another 60 days for reply comments. In an effort to handle the expected flood of comments, the FCC has set up a new online 'inbox' to take comments.
{ 0 comments... Views All / Send Comment! }
Post a Comment