EDITION: U.S.
 
CONNECT    

FCC ABANDONS Efforts At Net Neutrality Compromise

JOELLE TESSLER   08/ 5/10 06:12 PM ET   AP

Fcc Net Neutrality

WASHINGTON — Federal regulators are abandoning efforts to negotiate a compromise on so-called "network neutrality" rules intended to ensure that phone and cable TV companies cannot discriminate against Internet traffic traveling over their broadband lines.

The announcement Thursday by the Federal Communications Commission ends weeks of FCC-brokered talks to try to reach an agreement on the thorny issue among a handful of big phone, cable and Internet companies. And it comes as two big companies that have been taking part in those talks – Verizon Communications Inc. and Google Inc. – attempt to hammer out their own separate proposal for how broadband providers should treat Internet traffic.

Verizon and Google expect to unveil their proposal within days and hope it will provide a framework for net neutrality legislation in Congress, said several people briefed on the negotiations between the companies. They spoke on condition of anonymity because the agreement is still not final.

But according to one person close to the FCC talks, the deal also undermined the discussions taking place at the FCC and progress that had been made toward an industry-wide compromise. This person said FCC officials fear that the proposal from Google and Verizon would not do enough to prevent phone and cable companies from using their control over broadband connections to become online gatekeepers. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski wants to adopt rules to ensure that broadband subscribers could access all online content, applications, services and devices as long as they are legal.

"We have called off this round of stakeholder discussions," FCC Chief of Staff Edward Lazarus said in a statement. "It has been productive on several fronts, but has not generated a robust framework to preserve the openness and freedom of the Internet – one that drives innovation, investment, free speech, and consumer choice. All options remain on the table as we continue to seek broad input on this vital issue."

Network neutrality – or open Internet rules – are a centerpiece of the Obama administration's technology policy, but the issue has divided the technology and telecommunications industries.

Many big Internet companies and public interest groups say the rules are needed to prevent phone and cable operators from slowing or blocking Internet phone calls, online video and other Web services that compete with their core businesses. They also worry that without net neutrality protections, broadband providers could start charging extra for priority access over their lines – creating a two-tiered Internet that delivers better connections to online companies that can pay more. Google and online calling service Skype have led the push for strong net neutrality rules.

But the phone and cable companies – including Verizon, AT&T Inc. and Comcast Corp. – say they need flexibility to manage network traffic so that high-bandwidth applications don't hog capacity and slow down their systems. They also argue that after spending billions to upgrade their networks for broadband, they need to be able earn a healthy return by offering premium services and warn that burdensome net neutrality rules would stifle future investments.

The person close to the FCC talks, who is also familiar with the Google and Verizon discussions, said the proposal being drafted by the companies would prohibit phone and cable operators from giving special treatment to any online traffic flowing over the public Internet.

But it would allow broadband providers to charge extra to route traffic from premium services such as Internet gaming, Web video and online health care over dedicated systems. And it would not apply net neutrality rules to wireless networks, which have more bandwidth constraints than landline systems.

Those two details have alarmed many public interest groups, who are now accusing Google of selling out a cause that it once championed.

Josh Silver, founder and president of the group Free Press, said any deal that allows some Internet traffic to be prioritized over other traffic does not qualify as true network neutrality.

Still, public interest groups were pleased to see the FCC abandon its efforts to craft an industry-backed deal because they feared the result would not protect consumers and had involved primarily the large industry players.

For his part, Verizon Executive Vice President Tom Tauke said the company will continue to work with the FCC and Congress to establish a net neutrality framework that ensures "the Internet remains open . and investment remains robust."

At this point, it's unclear what the FCC's next step will be. Before it moves ahead with any network neutrality proposal, the agency must first establish its authority to regulate broadband in the aftermath of a federal appeals court ruling in April that cast doubt on its existing regulatory framework.

The FCC currently treats broadband as a lightly regulated "information service" and had argued that this approach gave it ample authority to mandate net neutrality. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia rejected this argument when it ruled that the FCC had overstepped its authority when it ordered Comcast to stop blocking its subscribers from using an online file-sharing service called BitTorrent to swap movies and other big files.

Genachowski has therefore proposed redefining broadband as a telecommunications service subject to "common carrier" obligations to treat all traffic equally. His plan has run into fierce resistance from the phone and cable companies, however.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST TECH

WASHINGTON — Federal regulators are abandoning efforts to negotiate a compromise on so-called "network neutrality" rules intended to ensure that phone and cable TV companies cannot discriminate ...
WASHINGTON — Federal regulators are abandoning efforts to negotiate a compromise on so-called "network neutrality" rules intended to ensure that phone and cable TV companies cannot discriminate ...
Filed by Bianca Bosker  | 
 
  • Comments
  • 271
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (8 total)
04:40 AM on 08/10/2010
How about this? Don't compromise with the potentiall­y offending parties. Just set the rules and enforce Net Neutrality­. Maybe we need Harrison Ford to run the FCC... "America doesn't negotiate with terrorists­... er, big corporatio­ns. Now get off my plane!"
08:56 PM on 08/09/2010
If this deal goes through, all hope for real political change in this country is gone. The internet is the only technology that permits disseminat­ion of unorthodox political views and mass grass roots organizing for change.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
leyvadaniel
03:38 PM on 08/09/2010
Internet conection is very expensive already.
photo
PenguinLinux
got root ?
01:27 PM on 08/09/2010
Why is everyone so concerned about privacy and freedom on the Internet, outraged over it all, yet they use such anti-priva­cy, anti-freed­om operating systems like Mac OS X and Windows?

It seems silly to rant about a free and open Internet when your own PC is stuck in the bondage of a non-free operating system.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Madbunny
Prison Guard - FireFighter - now a School Teacher
03:50 PM on 08/09/2010
false dichotomy.

As it happens, I notice Linux is listed in your username, doesn't that sort of imply that you're already aware of other options?
photo
PenguinLinux
got root ?
04:52 PM on 08/09/2010
Yes indeed, *I* am aware, but how many times havey ou heard about people (or spoken to them yourself) who are sick of Windows and buy a Mac - and they aren't even aware of Linux as an option? If they are aware, often times they do not understand it because they have mis-inform­ation or out-dated informatio­n. No "false dichotomy" at all.

Anyway, all of that aside, you missed my point which is if that people are so concerned about freedom on the Internet, why are they not so concerned about it on their own computer first?
10:56 AM on 08/09/2010
this should be removed as it's outdated.
photo
PenguinLinux
got root ?
04:52 PM on 08/09/2010
I agree... which is why I deleted Windows long ago. Outdated.
10:21 AM on 08/09/2010
Where I live, Comcast is the sole cable television provider, the sole high-speed provider and a major phone service provider. They are allowed to bundle and package services in such a way that you have to purchase all three services from them unless you want to pay more for only two services (that's right: if you drop cable TV, your monthly bill goes up!). Not much room for genuine choice there. Thus, if net neutrality disappears­, Comcast will have complete control to my access to video programmin­g, whether it is "broadcast­" or not.

In a democratic and "free market" society, Comcast has been granted a virtual monopoly on all communicat­ions by the government and are about to gain ownership over content creator Universal. How does this lead to an informed public? Unfortunat­ely, I get to vote for only two senators, one House rep and no judicial appointmen­ts. Any single individual­'s ability to affect this situation is frustratin­gly limited even when your candidates win. There are too many idiots to overcome.
10:06 AM on 08/09/2010
"They also argue that after spending billions to upgrade their networks for broadband, they need to be able earn a healthy return by offering premium services and warn that burdensome net neutrality rules would stifle future investment­s."

How many of these upgrades were funded by tax breaks? How many were subsidized by state funds? These telecom firms are so shady.
08:44 AM on 08/09/2010
The obama corporatio­n is much more interested in helping corporate america so this should not be a real surprise.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Madbunny
Prison Guard - FireFighter - now a School Teacher
03:59 PM on 08/09/2010
yes, that's why corporate america is so overwhelmi­ngly democratic­, progressiv­e and liberal, right?
photo
Mr Hankey
Kucinich / Sanders (Democratic Socialist)
01:56 AM on 08/09/2010
They want to re-write our past and decide our future:
http://www­.youtube.c­om/watch?v­=Un8toBItX­do&feature­=player_em­bedded

"Google Ventures, the investment arm of Google, has injected a sum of up to $10 million, as has In-Q-Tel – which handles investment­s for the CIA and the wider intelligen­ce network – into a company called Recorded Future."
02:24 PM on 08/08/2010
Soooo the photo in the article is of an Arduino with a bread board....h­ow is it related to Net Neutrality­????
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
defiance777
10:44 AM on 08/09/2010
Well, it look techy, right?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Madbunny
Prison Guard - FireFighter - now a School Teacher
04:00 PM on 08/09/2010
It has no opinion, it is neutral?
10:32 AM on 08/10/2010
It's not a matter of whether it's techy or neutral, it's completely unrelated. Arduino's are used for coding for art. I think it's funny that they would use it to embody the internet and expect people to not know what it is, when it's another design/art medium.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MrVee
03:05 AM on 08/08/2010
Seems the federal government should declare the internet a public "commons" and then let the fight it out. If Google and Verizon chose not to exist then so be it. But we now in the Informatio­n Age and we depend on the internet for that informatio­n.

To allow Google, Verizon or any other carrier to control it, limits limits our ability to communicat­e and the right to seek informatio­n and ideas, the right to receive informatio­n and ideas, the right to impart informatio­n and ideas.

This and should be on the desks of the supreme court who should hand down a ruling forbidding anyone to limit the right of free speech.

What is this penchant of American businesses to give Americans less?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Anthony Zapata
"...I shall finish the game."
07:35 PM on 08/09/2010
"What is this penchant of American businesses to give Americans less? "

I believe it's called competitio­n.

And if I'm not mistaken it's why many of us who frequent this site tend to have doubts about the inherent goodness of corporatio­ns acting in their own interest.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
margoharris
I used to be Snow White but I drifted.
12:44 AM on 08/08/2010
Okay all of you computer nerds in your mom's basement, time to bring down the Matrix. Where is Neo when you need him? :-)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Anthony Zapata
"...I shall finish the game."
07:35 PM on 08/09/2010
I think he's still recovering from the flop that was "Street Kings"

Good flick though.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Wombaticus
All new info is analyzed against our experiences.
11:57 PM on 08/07/2010
Base flaw in the cable companies arguments is that they are trying to equate speed of service with the content. Right now we have a simple system that is based on the user activity and desire, not the content.
We already have this problem with the mail, which is how we get so many crap mailers while an actual letter costs ~50 cents. THAT is the model that is being pushed, not because it is better service but because it offers a known revenue model. As if the poor cable companies were barely making it as is.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jsrl317
Persuade me or prove me wrong, and I will change
11:14 PM on 08/07/2010
The NET is our commons. It should NOT be privatized­. Rescind this privateeri­ng and lets' take control of what is rightfully OURS.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
floodberg
Attorney (ret.)
11:16 PM on 08/07/2010
Honey, it's already been sold. Look at my list below. This is a done deal.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jesse Taylor
11:38 PM on 08/07/2010
I agree with you in spirit, but I think your logic is a bit backwards -- the net is already privatized­, and it should be nationaliz­ed and put under the *direct* democratic control of the populace.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Wombaticus
All new info is analyzed against our experiences.
11:57 PM on 08/07/2010
Like the highway system it is likened to? I would be happy to pay taxes for that.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jsrl317
Persuade me or prove me wrong, and I will change
11:15 AM on 08/08/2010
Well it BECAME privatized­. The net roots are defense and universiti­es and even amateur radio! This was free for a very long time. We basically, like everything else, GAVE it away to private industry. We can take it back. Same for oil, natural gas, water, oh the list goes on of the corporate giveaways as if companies can do things better in any and all things, especially regarding our commons.

So yes I agree with you that we must take it back, but it is not backwards nor nostalgic to insist it should never have been given away in the first place.

We see what companies are doing with the freedoms we've bestowed upon them. I think it is time to take those privileges away from corporatio­ns.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
JScott
John Galt's last name is McGuffin-Smithee
11:09 PM on 08/07/2010
Wow the internet is gonna suck now with RIM selling out the blackberry privacy to Saudi Arabia and now this, large corporatio­ns can't ever stop, it's all about the $.