FCC passes new net neutrality rules
Tuesday, December 21, 2010 at 2:32 pm
- 8 Comments
The Federal Communications Commission passed a set of rules Tuesday “to preserve basic Internet values,” but advocates of net neutrality say the new rules do not go far enough. Sen. Al Franken called the measures “simply inadequate,” while Republicans have vowed to push to repeal the new framework.
Under the new rules, telecommunications companies cannot discriminate in what internet content they allow to their customers to access. Net neutrality advocates have said that without a framework, large businesses could pay large telecommunications companies to direct internet traffic to their businesses without the consumer knowing that other websites had been skipped over, a practice known as paid prioritization.
Under the rules, telecoms can only manage their data in that manner if there is network congestion or spam, and they must disclose their policies should they plan to manage the data.
“The FCC’s action today is simply inadequate to protect consumers or preserve the free and open Internet,” Sen. Franken said in a statement following the FCC vote. “I am particularly disappointed to learn that the order will not specifically ban paid prioritization, allowing big companies to pay for a fast lane on the Internet and abandoning the foundation of net neutrality. The rule also contains almost no protections for mobile broadband service, remaining silent on the blocking of content, applications, and devices. Wireless technology is the future of the Internet, and for many rural Minnesotans, it’s often the only choice for broadband.”
Franken did give the commission some credit, however. “I’m particularly encouraged by the inclusion of language cautioning that the FCC’s silence on certain kinds of discriminatory behavior by wireless carriers doesn’t tacitly condone it. While this is far from adequate, it stops us from taking a step backward.”
Hours after the vote, Republicans in Congress vowed to repeal the new FCC framework saying it could hurt profits for telecoms.
Follow Andy Birkey on Twitter8 Comments
Comment posted December 21, 2010 @ 3:33 pm
Al Franken is either delusional or in denial. Off hand, I’d say it’s the former.
The federal courts have already ruled that the FCC has no jurisdiction over internet providers. So these new “rules” are bogus.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36193558/ns/technology_and_science-security/
Comment posted December 21, 2010 @ 4:36 pm
Hmmm. So the courts have ruled that FCC has no jurisdication over ISPs. Fortunately, Congress can act to pass legislation to grant the FCC that jursidication. No problem.
Comment posted December 22, 2010 @ 12:04 am
> … The rule also contains almost no protections for mobile broadband service, remaining silent on the blocking of content, applications, and devices. Wireless technology is the future of the Internet, and for many rural Minnesotans, it’s often the only choice for broadband.”
This is due to a Bush-era decision that classified broadband Internet providers outside of the legal framework that traditionally applied to companies that offer two-way communication services. Undoing this decision to re-regulate broadband ISPs appears to be problematic at this point in time absent explicit legal authority to do so.
I could see the potential impact on the Deaf who rely on high-speed video relay service applications on their various mobile devices. UGH!
Comment posted December 22, 2010 @ 8:14 am
The FCC’s mock neutrality policy is nothing more than a power grab by Verizon and AT&T. The public won’t stand for it once they see what the telecommunications giants are planning, regardless of jurisdiction arguments.
Comment posted December 22, 2010 @ 8:07 pm
Verizon and AT&T are not ISP’s: they are telecoms and are subject to FCC regulatory jurisdiction as “common carriers.” The Comcast decision referenced in the news article dealt with the DC Court of Appeals ruling overturning FCC’s exercise of “ancillary jurisdiction” over cable companies like Comcast. Which everyone knows is providing common carrier type services Who knows why the FCC did not try to overturn that decision. But it probably thinks it has a better chance with Congress enacting a New Communications Act. The Republicans, as usual are standing up for the monopolies , worried their profitability will be hurt by competition with an unregulated Comcast. Boo hoo!
Comment posted December 23, 2010 @ 11:42 am
> Verizon and AT&T are not ISP’s: they are telecoms and are subject to FCC regulatory jurisdiction as “common carriers.”
I wonder if that part of either telecom that provides mobile broadband services are exempted from FCC oversight due to that DC Court of Appeals ruling. Why else would these traditional telecoms be involved in this issue?
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
