Net Neutrality By: Jonathan Zamora

What is Net Neutrality? Who: Owners of the physical network Network Neutrality is the idea that Internet access providers should not discriminate with regard to what applications an individual can use, or the content an individual can upload, download, or interact with over the network. Individuals acquiring services from Internet access providers should be able to use the applications and devices of their choice, and interact with the content of their choice anywhere on the Internet. Who: Owners of the physical network Internet Service Providers (ISPs) Should not discriminate against particular: Websites Content (such as video) Applications Devices

Where did the idea of Net Neutrality come from? Common Carrier – regulated company that transports goods or people and cannot discriminate as to who or what it carries. Public Airlines, Railroads, Bus Lines, Cruise Lines, Freight Companies, and Telephone Companies ISPs are NOT common carriers currently They are “information services”

Major Cases and Regulations FCC Computer Inquiries 1966: C.I. 1 – computers being added to the ends of telephone network. These enhancements threatened to be a substitute for regulated services, and regulated services threatened to be a bottleneck for the growth of these services. C.I. 1 - safeguards put into place to restrain the market power of the communications companies for the benefit of the data processing market. Pure Communications, Pure Data Processing, Hybrid

Computer Inquiries 2 C.I. 2 – 1976 : Basic vs Enhanced Services Division between common carrier transmission services and computer services which depend on common carrier services in the transmission of information. “Maximum Separation” safeguard required separate subsidiaries. Applied only to the large carriers: AT&T and GTE. Enhanced Services remain unregulated on the grounds that the market was competitive.

Computer Inquiries 3 C.I. 3 – 1985 Structural separation Cost: decreased efficiency and innovation… Outweighed the benefit: preventing large telecoms from putting up barriers to entry on enhanced services. Comparatively Efficient Interconnection (CEI): a separate subsidiary was no longer needed, but large telecoms had to provide info and plans needed for other companies to sell enhanced services over their networks. Enhanced Services are still unregulated.

FCC Open Internet “Policy Statement” 2005: FCC releases a “policy statement” that outlines four principles to encourage broadband deployment and preserve and promote the open and interconnected nature of public Internet: Consumers are entitled to access the lawful Internet content of their choice Consumers are entitled to run applications and services of their choice, subject to the needs of law enforcement Consumers are entitled to connect their choice of legal devices that do not harm the network Consumers are entitled to competition among network providers, application and service providers, and content providers. Although FCC did not adopt rules in this regard, it will incorporate these principles into its ongoing policymaking activities.

Comcast vs FCC 2010 In 2008 the FCC found that Comcast had improperly slowed traffic to the BitTorrent file-sharing site and urged the company to halt the practice. It did not impose a fine. In April of 2010 a U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Comcast, saying the FCC lacks the authority to force Internet service providers to keep their networks open to all forms of content.

“The fate of the Internet is too large a matter to be decided by negotiations involving two companies, even companies as big as Verizon and Google.” -Gigi Sohn, president and founder of public advocacy group Public Knowledge http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/05/technology/05secret.html?_r=2&hp

“If the government regulates net neutrality, policies for internet access are set by one entity: the FCC. However, if the government stays out, each company will set its own policies. If you don’t like the FCC’s policies, you are stuck with them unless you leave the United States. If you don’t like your internet service provider’s policies, you can simply switch to another one. So which model sounds better to you?” -Lee Sharpe http://www.thelessonapplied.com/2010/08/11/the-case-against-net-neutrality/

How Net Neutrality Impacts Society Arguments For: Companies could manipulate the decisions a consumer makes by limiting his or her choices. A lack of Net Neutrality would present boundaries to free information sharing. Limit innovations Network regulation could raise privacy concerns. Because corporations must act in the interest of their shareholders, there is no assurance that the public interest will be served.

How Net Neutrality Impacts Society Arguments Against: Regulation breeds regulation Neutrality forces companies to act against their own interest Transform the Internet from user-centric to more FCC-governed Leads to less choice for consumers

What Others Are Saying Chip Bruce, professor of library and information science at the University of Illinois: [Defeating Net Neutrality is] “a first step away from open access to information and toward pre-packaged service.” The FCC should reclassify broadband from an information system to a telecommunications system.

“The ordinary user will see some enticing new services, as each corporation tries to lure customers. But she or he will not find some content they find now, because it won’t support the business model.” “Do you want your Internet provider to decide what you can and cannot see?”

What Others Are Saying Edward Whitacre, AT&T CEO “The Internet can’t be free in that sense, because we and the cable companies have made an investment and for a Google or Yahoo! or Vonage or anybody to expect to use these pipes [for] free is nuts!”

Pending Laws and Failed Legislations Net Neutrality Pending Laws and Failed Legislations

Network Neutrality Proposed Legislations It is a violation of the Clayton antitrust Act for broadband providers to: fail to provide access to its broadband network on reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms and conditions to anyone to offer content, applications or services at least equal to the broadband provider’s own services. refuse to interconnect with other broadband providers to block impair, discriminate or interfere with anyone’s services or applications or content; to prohibit attachment of equipment that does not harm the network; If a broadband provider prioritizes traffic of a particular type, it must prioritize all traffic of that same type, with no additional fee.

The Internet Non-Discrimination Act of 2006 (S. 2360) Introduced to the House in March 2, 2006 This is an initial attempt to codify network neutrality in the law The House voted on it on April 26, 2006 Referred to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation Stalled

Approved and sent to the House floor on May 1st. The Communications Opportunities Promotion and Enhancement (COPE) Act(H.R. 5252) March 30, 2006 Clarifies the FCC authority to prevent Internet service providers from blocking or degrading any content or applications delivered over the public Internet. Approved and sent to the House floor on May 1st. Won 321-101 votes and sent to Senate

Communications, Consumers’ Choice, and Broadband Deployment Act of 2006 (S2686) May 1, 2006 Senate’s Modified version of the COPE Act Failed 28-8 in the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet Failed 34-22 in the full vote of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce

The Network Neutrality Act of 2006 (H.R. 5273) Introduced in Senate on April 3, 2006 To be attached to the COPE Act Stalled in House Committee on Energy and Commerce

Internet Freedom and Nondiscrimination Act of 2006 (H.R. 5417) Introduced May 18, 2006 Proposes a change in the Clayton Anti Trust Act Prohibit certain kinds of discrimination by broadband network providers Content, applications, services Restrict sending or receiving lawful content Prohibits charge of premiums for unrestricted access to lawful content Approved by House of Judiciary on May 25, 2006 Never reached the House of Representatives

The Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2006 (S.2917) Introduced May 19, 2006 by Sen. Snowe Referred to Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation where it stalled.

The Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2007 (S. 215) Introduced January 9, 2007 Formerly (S.2917) Purpose was to enter Network Neutrality into Law Co sponsored by Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Referred to Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation where it stalled.

The Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2009 H.R. 3458) Introduced on July 31, 2009 Prohibits ISPs from discriminating against users, prioritizing the traffic of any particular content provider, or imposing certain charges on any Internet content, service, or application provider. Currently stalled in the House