iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Net Neutrality Rules Approved By Divided FCC

JOELLE TESSLER   12/21/10 09:26 PM ET   AP

Fcc

WASHINGTON — Federal regulators adopted new rules Tuesday to keep the companies that control the Internet's pipelines from restricting what their customers do online or blocking competing services, including online calling applications and Web video.

The vote by the Federal Communications Commission was 3-2 and quickly came under attack from the commission's two Republicans, who said the rules would discourage investments in broadband. Prominent Republicans in Congress vowed to work to overturn them.

Meanwhile, critics at the other end of the political spectrum were disappointed that the new regulations don't do enough to safeguard the fastest-growing way that people access the Internet today – through wireless devices like smart phones and tablets.

The new rules have the backing of the White House and capped a year of efforts by FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski to find a compromise. They are intended to ensure that broadband providers cannot use their control of the Internet's on-ramps to dictate where their subscribers can go.

They will prohibit phone and cable companies from favoring or discriminating against Internet content and services that travel over their networks – including online calling services such as Skype, Internet video services such as Netflix and other applications that compete with their core businesses.

The prohibitions, known as "net neutrality," have been at the center of a Washington policy dispute for at least five years. The issue hit home with many Internet users in 2007, when Comcast Corp. slowed traffic from an Internet file-sharing service called BitTorrent. The cable giant argued that the service, which was used to trade movies and other big files over the Internet, was clogging its network.

The new FCC rules are intended to prevent that type of behavior.

They require broadband providers to let subscribers access all legal online content, applications and services over their wired networks. They do give providers flexibility to manage data on their systems to deal with network congestion and unwanted traffic, including spam, as long as they publicly disclose how they manage the network.

"Today, for the first time, we are adopting rules to preserve basic Internet values," Genachowski said. "For the first time, we'll have enforceable rules of the road to preserve Internet freedom and openness."

On one level, the new rules probably won't mean big changes for Internet users. After Comcast's actions cast a spotlight on the issue – and drew a rebuke from the FCC – all of the major broadband providers have already pledged not to discriminate against Internet traffic on their wired networks.

Even Genachowski acknowledged Tuesday that a key goal of the new rules is to preserve the open Internet as it exists today.

Still, critics say the rules don't do enough to break the existing lock-hold that wireless carriers have over the online applications that subscribers can access through their systems.

The regulations prohibit wireless carriers from blocking access to any websites or competing services such as Internet calling applications on mobile devices, and they require carriers to disclose their network management practices, too. But wireless companies get more leeway to manage data traffic because wireless systems have less network bandwidth and can become overwhelmed with traffic more easily than wired lines.

That means that while wireless carriers must allow access to Internet calling services such as Skype, they could potentially still block online video applications, such as Sling.

The rules also wouldn't apply to phone makers, so Apple could still dictate which applications to accept or reject for the iPhone. Apple could choose to block Skype, for instance, even if AT&T, which provides wireless service for the iPhone, can't.

At a time when more and more people go online using smart phones and other mobile devices instead of computers, the rules leave wireless carriers with tremendous control over tomorrow's Internet, said Gigi Sohn, president of the public interest group Public Knowledge.

At the same time, Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., fears the rules don't do enough to ensure that broadband providers cannot favor their own traffic or the traffic of business partners that can pay extra. Big websites such as Google Inc., for instance, could pay to have their content download more quickly than mom-and-pop sites – leading to what critics term a two-tiered Internet.

While the new rules prohibit unreasonable network discrimination – a category that FCC officials say would most likely include such "paid prioritization" – they do not explicitly bar the practice. What's more, they leave the door open for broadband providers to experiment with routing traffic from specialized services, such as home security systems, over dedicated networks as long as they're kept separate from the public Internet.

These concerns resonated with Genachowski's two Democratic colleagues at the FCC, who voted to approve the rules only reluctantly.

"Today's action could – and should – have gone further," said Michael Copps, one of the other two Democrats on the commission. But, he added, the regulations do represent some progress "to put consumers – not Big Phone or Big Cable – in control of their online experiences."

Republicans, meanwhile, said they worry the rules will discourage phone and cable companies from upgrading their networks because it will be more difficult for them to earn a healthy return on their investments. Republicans also said the regulations seek to fix a problem that doesn't exist because broadband providers have already pledged not to discriminate.

"The Internet will be no more open tomorrow than it is today," said Meredith Attwell Baker, one of the two FCC Republicans, in voting against the rules.

A number of prominent Republicans – including Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas, the top Republican on the Senate Commerce Committee, and Fred Upton of Michigan, the incoming chairman of the House Commerce Committee – vowed to try to overturn the rules.

Robert McDowell, the FCC's other Republican, predicted that the FCC will face court challenges to its regulatory authority as well.

In April, a federal appeals court ruled that the agency had exceeded its existing authority in sanctioning Comcast for discriminating against online file-sharing traffic on its network – violating broad net neutrality principles first established by the FCC in 2005.

Those principles serve as a foundation for the formal rules adopted Tuesday.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST TECH

WASHINGTON — Federal regulators adopted new rules Tuesday to keep the companies that control the Internet's pipelines from restricting what their customers do online or blocking competing servic...
WASHINGTON — Federal regulators adopted new rules Tuesday to keep the companies that control the Internet's pipelines from restricting what their customers do online or blocking competing servic...
Filed by Bianca Bosker  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,005
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (13 total)
02:12 PM on 12/31/2010
Wait a second...you mean there just might be something fair in the U.S.? Thank goodness here come the Republicans to put a stop to that right now! Oh yeah, and while they're at it, isn't there another big tax break they can give away to rich folk (corporate shills gotta eat too, ya know).
02:16 PM on 12/26/2010
Comcrap sukcs no matter how you look at it...
07:12 PM on 12/31/2010
Got that right. Hey, I'm out here in Denver, where they're now running ads nonstop about how fantastic their service is, and their people can help us 24/7. So I had this problem and called in the middle of the night, and was helped by a gentleman who said he was located in Mexico. He could barely speak English and he had no fix for my lack of internet connection. Then I asked for a billing credit because I was pretty annoyed with no service, and he told me I had to call back during the day to get their billing office.

When I had first seen their new ads, I was bemused that they went to so much trouble to film people of color, but I really did not guess that this ad commitment to diversity was the real thing. Literally. Now I don't have a particular dispute with outsourcing this type of white-collar (approximately) job to Mexico, figuring they need the work even worse than we do, but I did find this hilarious.
01:22 PM on 12/26/2010
big corporations always win they have more money to throw around to the right people in Washington.
photo
Yank in France
Rien se cree tout se transforme
02:07 AM on 12/23/2010
For once, I have strong opinion to express: just congratulation to the author for writing a very informative report, which I sorely need. I still to learn more about this pressing issue but this is a start for me!
photo
damnedgentlemen
No Your Honor, I was not aware of that
08:36 PM on 12/22/2010
I've been doing a little research on these rules. A short list of "people" who dislike them:
FOX
Republican­s
the Wall Street Journal

Sleep peacefully my little web geeks, the FCC musta done good.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ProfGiles
09:57 AM on 12/22/2010
This ruling would set up a two-tiered Internet where carriers can sell a higher level of access to those willing to pay more. Sure, they can't technically "slow down" or "divert" traffic for non-Corporate users, but they can now create new high-bandwidth access for Corporate users who can afford the premium access. This is why the carriers have been holding back in implementing the higher-bandwidth technologies available and in use in other countries. They have been waiting for this ruling so they can sell it to the highest Corporate bidders. They can now create essentially two separate tracks on the Internet and separate is not equal. Corporations will be able to pay for better access to their sites while everyone else is relegated to a second rate Internet.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rtaylor1974
Obama=Austerity at Home..War Abroad
03:54 PM on 12/22/2010
They already were going to do this with or without this bill. Just now speeds wont be reduced because of it. Plus it opens the doors for other companies to NOT have tiered systems essentially creating the good mixture of competition needed. With competition innovation happens...Its just that simple... these Telcom companies are not your friend.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rich Phitzwell
01:37 PM on 12/23/2010
Its more than about speeds, its been an issue over the past few years of certain telco's blocking certain sites. A couple of months ago sbc blocked many godaddy servers for instance and a few of my sites were affected. The problem is lets say comcast decides to block traffic originating from att, or time warner blocking non cnn news sites. Its happened many times, just on a smaller scale than most Americans would know.
05:21 AM on 12/22/2010
Given our governments recent history I'm afraid the decision will go to the highest bidder.
photo
BoFo
Like, you talkin' to me?
01:11 AM on 12/22/2010
High-speed Internet access used to be a luxury, but has become as crucial a communicat­ions tool as telephone service and, as such, should be managed as a public utility.

The prices that the telecommun­ications monopolies charge for internet access are outrageous and are totally out of proportion to the actual cost of providing that service. Technologi­cal innovation­s have significan­tly lowered the cost of providing high-speed Internet access, yet the price-fixi­ng monopolies keep raising their prices because they know they can get away with it.

The old AT&T was broken up, but then SBC was allowed to buy up all the baby bells and become another monopoly. They even changed their name to AT&T.

One of the best sources of info on this subject is:
http://www­.teletruth­.org”
photo
BoFo
Like, you talkin' to me?
01:14 AM on 12/22/2010
Oops, that's

http://www­­.teletrut­h­.org
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sabrina1
11:22 AM on 12/31/2010
Excellent site. Thank you.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dave Bee
A robot in disguise
12:03 AM on 12/22/2010
clogging their network? Yea, their 15 year old network. You dont hear the japanese or south koreans or french or british providers complaining, because they LAUGH at our network. They literally laugh at how the "greatest" nation has itself an internet infrastructure that is one of the slowest in the free world. Were a joke and its Comcasts fault.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rich Phitzwell
01:39 PM on 12/23/2010
Its a bit more difficult to have a consistent infrastructure across a country that is over 2000 miles wide and a population spread thin in the middle.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
lj9283
Why is "Carried Interest" not taxed as Income?
10:29 PM on 12/21/2010
From the article by Tim Berners-Le­e

Keeping the web universal and keeping its standards open help people invent new services. But a third principle—­the separation of layers—par­titions the design of the Web from that of the Internet.
This separation is fundamenta­l. The Web is an applicatio­n that runs on the Internet, ..... An analogy is that the Web is like a household appliance that runs on the electricit­y network. A refrigerat­or or printer can function as long as it uses a few standard protocols—­in the U.S., things like operating at 120 volts and 60 hertz. Similarly, any applicatio­n—among them the Web, e-mail or instant messaging—­can run on the Internet as long as it uses a few standard Internet protocols, such as TCP and IP.

Manufactur­ers can improve refrigerat­ors and printers without altering how electricit­y functions, and utility companies can improve the electrical network without altering how appliances function. The two layers of technology work together but can advance independen­tly. The same is true for the Web and the Internet. The separation of layers is crucial for innovation­. In 1990 the Web rolled out over the Internet without any changes to the Internet itself, as have all improvemen­ts since. And in that time, Internet connection­s have sped up from 300 bits per second to 300 million bits per second (Mbps) without the Web having to be redesigned to take advantage of the upgrades.

Although internet and web designs are separate, a Web user is also an Internet user and therefore relies on an Internet that is free from interferen­ce. In the early Web days it was too technicall­y difficult for a company or country to manipulate the Internet to interfere with an individual Web user. Technology for interferen­ce has become more powerful.

 Net neutrality maintains that if I have paid for an Internet connection at a certain quality, say, 300 Mbps, and have paid for that quality, then our communicat­ions should take place at that quality. Protecting this concept would prevent a big ISP from sending you video from a media company it may own at 300 Mbps but sending video from a competing media company at a slower rate. That amounts to commercial discrimina­tion.  What if your ISP made it easier for you to connect to a particular online shoe store and harder to reach others? What if the ISP made it difficult for you to go to Web sites about certain political parties, or religions, or sites about evolution?

http://www­.scientifi­camerican.­com/articl­e.cfm?id=l­ong-live-t­he-web
08:59 PM on 12/21/2010
There are four issues here: the Internet, cable, wireless companies, and smart phone manufacturers.

The Internet is tiered. If searching for a product or service, you get companies that are local and not in a foreign country because the Internet search engine is monitoring you, sees your community, and provides services within reach. Furthermore, companies able to pay Google, Bing, or Yahoo have their service listings prioritized.

Cable companies want what the search engine companies have. Pay more and better service. Cable needs to be regulated by a public utility commission (PUC) – especially if they are the only game in town and they should offer a LINE. Offering a line and Internet services creates a monopoly. Break them up.

Wireless companies are becoming like the cable companies. They need to offer a line and not Internet service. The wireless companies are even dictating what telephone you can use on their network. Monopoly and Monopoly! Imagine if AT&T dictating the type of phone you can on a landline! Attorney Generals? Yet, foreigners come into the country with the phones that they purchase overseas and get onto their networks – without 2 year contract!

Smart phone providers need to demand that their phones work on any network. The practice of selling phone for $500 WITHOUT a 2-year contract or $150 WITH one is predatory!

Net neutrality? The FCC should handle the real issues first!
09:20 PM on 12/21/2010
Well at least with search you do have choices (Google, Bing, Yahoo etc). With the internet you just have the internet. And search is a service of the internet and you don't have to use search to use the internet.

Not sure if a public utility commission would be necessary, how about instead getting all local governments to build public fiber networks and have companies compete for providers on the public network. I've seen it work and it works REALLY WELL. Really well. I would like to see that happen in more cities, if not all.

Super sad day for me as a technology enthusiast. Can anyone tell me why this had to be voted on today?
10:15 PM on 12/21/2010
Municipalities have built networks and some work very well. Some municipalities cannot afford to build networks and that is where some of the abuses already occur.

Can you imagine AT&T land-line service telling you whom you can call within your community? Likewise, no cable or wireless company should tell you what site you can visit.

The corporations have been pushing this issue and the FCC was backed into a corner. If you read the ruling, it was nothing more than a "there-there you guys play nice" notice.

The real fight will begin when the cable and wireless guys start stepping hard on our toes. Again - where are the Attorney Generals?
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
MSROADKILL612
love auto biographys. any appS to write mine?
08:39 PM on 12/21/2010
I hope zillions of others havnt said the same, but I hope the laws allow discrimination in favour of VOIP data packets. VOIP uses very little bandwidth, but latency is the enemy.
08:06 PM on 12/21/2010
Control of the medium means always control of the message, sooner or later, and that's one thing that every obama dictator wannabe covets.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ariveria
08:53 PM on 12/21/2010
oops you got that wrong. control of the medium means always control of the message, sooner or later, and thats one thing that every anti american republican/conservative/teabagger covets.

look at what caused this comcast controlling what their customers could and couldnt do on line overturned the old rules. comcast then started fighting with netflicks. the goal was to prevent comcast customers from using netflicks internet moves but buying comcast movies.

with comcast buying nbc do you think you will have access to abc websites if these rules dont pass.

this is not about government censoring the internet this is about companies not censoring the internet. it is about not censoring the internet at all. which is of course why anti american republican/conservative/teabaggers oppose it.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

2Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them. 3For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. 4They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.
Jeremiah 10:2-4
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
OnePartyEqualsTyranny
An Oligopoly Government.
06:46 PM on 12/24/2010
Seek help please
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
lj9283
Why is "Carried Interest" not taxed as Income?
10:21 PM on 12/21/2010
And network neutrality regulates the environment so that no one is allowed control of the medium. That's one thing every Rush worshiper fears.
photo
Lorianne
ama vitam
02:00 AM on 12/23/2010
Bad example.
No one person controls satellite radio ... or regular radio.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TeaLady005
08:06 PM on 12/21/2010
Hugo Chavez instituted  "Net Neutrality" to restrict the flow of opposition news. The internet was working just fine before the federal government got involved all in the name of "protecting us".  Wake up people!
08:10 PM on 12/21/2010
hugo, castro, and obama all think it's a great idea so what's the problem?
08:15 PM on 12/21/2010
Oh jeez. I know you guys hate President Obama. That's a given, but will somebody please detail how this expressly prohibits freedom of speech or choice?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Aj Beamish
More human than you, man.
08:13 PM on 12/21/2010
Just because Chavez called it (or more than likely what you called he did) "Net Neutrality" don't mean it is.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rubiconski
On Crisis Standby Mode
07:34 PM on 12/21/2010
Wireless Internet will be controlled and manipulated by large corporate interests.

"Major network stakeholders like Verizon and AT&T would be able to sell bandwidth in capped tiers, with overage charges for users who download too much information, and certain types of data traffic like peer-to-peer file transfers could be banned altogether."

This is exactly what Net neutrality was ment to stop; tiered pricing.

Thanks Obama for campaigning on something and then doing the EXACT opposite.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rtaylor1974
Obama=Austerity at Home..War Abroad
04:25 PM on 12/22/2010
It has to be done because it would stifle innovation ..Our networks need to be overhauled , and upgraded, and the only way that happens is if the competition forces these big conglomerate companies to develop the infrastructure or lose MONEY. Which if you havent noticed is the driving force behind enacting this legislation. They will beef up their networks before they let a smaller company steal any of their customers away. Stop blaming Obama 4 everything.... I suppose we should get rid of all regulation right ?? Tell you what next time you take your own garbage to the landfill.....