FCC Passes Net Neutrality Rules

December 21, 2010

The Federal Communications Commission voted 3-2 today to pass new net neutrality rules intended to block broadband companies from interfering with their customers' Internet access, The Associated Press reports.

The new rules - a compromise measure following years of debate - "require broadband providers to let subscribers access all legal online content, applications and services over their wired networks" but give broadband providers the flexibility to manage data as long as they publicly disclose their practices, according to AP.

"The measure pleased few, and raised howls of outrage from those who say the measure will stifle broadband investment and those who say the measure doesn't do enough to keep online innovation thriving," Wired reports.

Sascha Meinrath, director of the New America Foundation's Open Technology Initiative, told Wired, "Despite promising to fulfill President Obama's campaign promise of enacting network neutrality rules to protect an open Internet, the FCC has instead prioritized the profits of corporations like AT&T over those of the general public, Internet entrepreneurs, and local businesses across the country."

And The Blog of Legal Times reports that even members of the FCC predict "legal challenges are all but certain."

Sen. Al Franken called net neutrality "the most important free speech issue of our time," in a column in The Huffington Post yesterday anticipating today's FCC vote.

"If they approve it as is, I'll be outraged. And you should be, too," he writes. He continues:

Mobile networks like AT&T and Verizon Wireless would be able to shut off your access to content or applications for any reason. For instance, Verizon could prevent you from accessing Google Maps on your phone, forcing you to use their own mapping program, Verizon Navigator, even if it costs money to use and isn't nearly as good. Or a mobile provider with a political agenda could prevent you from downloading an app that connects you with the Obama campaign (or, for that matter, a Tea Party group in your area).

It gets worse. The FCC has never before explicitly allowed discrimination on the Internet -- but the draft Order takes a step backwards, merely stating that so-called "paid prioritization" (the creation of a "fast lane" for big corporations who can afford to pay for it) is cause for concern.

It sure is -- but that's exactly why the FCC should ban it. Instead, the draft Order would have the effect of actually relaxing restrictions on this kind of discrimination.

The Yale Law and Policy Review's online companion Inter Alia, has released a symposium on net neutrality rules, which includes a piece by George Washington University law professor Dawn Nunziato on First Amendment considerations and Harvard Law and computer science professor Jonathan Zittrain on rethinking net neutrality in diplomacy terms. Click here to read the collection of articles.

[image via M3Li55@]   

Google/Verizon proposal

How do the new FCC rules compare to the proposal by Google and Verizon a few months ago? It seems quite similar. How influential was the Google/Verizon proposal on the FCC?

The Google/Verizon proposal was a realistic compromise, but not neutrality.

Net Neutrality act

Hi,

Is there a first amendment issue that must meet strict scrutiny test. If so, the U.S. Sup.Ct will want to reverse this act. There must be a necessary and compelling reason the gov. fill's if purpose. The gov. interest must advance and fit that need. finally it must fit the least restrict means. This is a very hard test to pass. Under a different test such as intermediate scrutiny or rational basis test which the easiest way to justify a gov. legitimate way in passing a bill under first amendment issues.

I am keeping this extremely simple just out of the top of my head. I fill that this bill will be attacked by the U.S.S.CT. specially after a federal judge ruled against it already and that congress over 300 member also voted to go against this bill. I think I said too much. You know where the kill switch is and if the internet get's out of control. Then in Marry land they can kill it at the disposal of the government.

I really Thank the government should have some say so and the others too!

Thanks for allowing to post.

By

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.