Karen Petruska's List: Net neutrality

• D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals today overturned the FCC ruling against Comcast for interfering with the BitTorrent traffic of its subscribers.
• overstepped the limits of its "ancillary authority"
• Here's the problem: Congress has never given the FCC any authority to regulate the Internet for the purpose of ensuring net neutrality.
• So while we are big supporters of net neutrality, we are glad that today's ruling has reasserted the important limits on the FCC's authority to regulate the Internet.
• net neutrality advocates urging the FCC to "reclassify" Internet access services

3 more annotations...

• so-called net neutrality ground rules that would allow certain prioritization of Web sites on fixed wire networks and no rules on wireless networks
• upset participants in the meeting, who were moving closer to agreement on stronger rules against blocking and slowing traffic on wireless and fixed-wire networks.
• 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

1 more annotation...

• agreement where the broadband carrier would deliver Google content at higher internet traffic speeds for a fee.
• "This new nondiscrimination principle includes a presumption against prioritization of internet traffic -- including paid prioritization
• their proposal would still allow for "broadband providers to offer additional, differentiated online services,
• Such a proposal suggests a backdoor for carriers like Verizon to keep the internet open while finding other ways to charge for content through a competing network

2 more annotations...

• Looks like Google and Verizon were, in fact, in talks over Net Neutrality after all, calling it a “thorny” issue, no less. Hm.
• creation of a codified framework that they will submit to lawmakers
• To me, point five seems like carte blanche for the creation almost of a second Internet.
• in addition to that, and destroying the very idea of an open Internet, ISPs will be able to offer, say, an “Internet Plus” option.

• The Free Press puts it even more forcefully:

   

   Google and Verizon can try all they want to disguise this deal as a reasonable path forward, but the simple fact is this framework, if embraced by Congress and the Federal Communications Commission, would transform the free and open Internet into a closed platform like cable television.
• And what about wireless broadband? You’ll notice that it was explicitly excluded from all of Google and Verizon’s noble talk of “empowering” consumers.
• you can bet Google and Verizon will be spending millions of dollars buttering up Congress to get their way, which is just depressing when you think about it

5 more annotations...

• Disclosure: The Washington Post Co. has interests in broadcast and cable television and businesses that depend on the Internet, all of which could be affected by FCC action or inaction.
• Mr. Genachowski, in an effort at compromise, chose a third way: apply only a few of the common-carrier provisions to parts of broadband delivery.
• reversals should be linked to significant market shifts.
• What is needed is a fourth way: The agency, industry, consumer groups and other interested parties should work with Congress to craft clear but limited rules tailored to broadband.
• Advocates of increased oversight worry that the often-protracted legislative process will leave a gaping regulatory void that ISPs will exploit to engage in mischief. This is nonsense

  • Oh, good gried. Check out history, please.

3 more annotations...

• The cause of the hysteria was a statement issued last week by Google and Verizon focusing on the need for more competition instead of more regulation to support the "open Internet"—a more apt term than the loaded "net neutrality."
• Google made the simple point that competition justifies treating wireless differently from traditional access.
• does anyone really want an operating role for federal bureaucrats?

  • oooh, that's slick. Play up America's distrust of government. Cause trusting conglomerates is better?
• Regulations today leave providers uncertain whether they can earn back investments in broadband by charging for better levels of service.
• Network operators need more regulatory certainty that they can get paid—and get new customers—for offering new services, which will make the Web function better for all.
• The railroads were the Internet of their day,
• Regulators protected incumbent railroads from competitors, suppressed new technologies, and left consumers with fewer choices and higher prices.
• U.S. railroads sunk into a morass of regulation and proved unable to compete with new modes and new technologies."
• The equivalent regulatory capture for the Internet would protect large providers and established Web sites at the expense of new technologies and startups.

  • This is very clever. Catch-22

7 more annotations...

• On November 19, 2010, Comcast informed Level 3 that, for the first time, it will demand a recurring fee from Level 3 to transmit Internet online movies and other content to Comcast’s customers who request such content. By taking this action, Comcast is effectively putting up a toll booth at the borders of its broadband Internet access network
• When a Comcast customer requests such content, for example an online movie or game, Level 3 transmits the content to Comcast for delivery to consumers.
• With this action, Comcast is preventing competing content from ever being delivered to Comcast’s subscribers at all, unless Comcast’s unilaterally-determined toll is paid – even though Comcast’s subscribers requested the content
• Comcast offered Level 3 the same terms it offers to Level 3′s CDN competitors for the same traffic.
• Level 3′s position is duplicitous. When another network provider tried to pass traffic onto Level 3 this way, Level 3 said this is not the way settlement-free peering works in the Internet world. When traffic is way out of balance, Level 3 said, it will insist on a commercially negotiated solution.
• To be lasting, business relationships should be mutually beneficial

4 more annotations...

• The allegations come as the Philadelphia-based cable titan seeks to wrap up federal reviews of its merger with NBC Universal.
• Level 3's complaint also comes as the Federal Communications Commission prepares to issue more-formal rules that would force broadband providers to treat all content equally.
• Level 3's networks deliver content such as videos, Web sites and games to networks operated by cable and telephone companies, which then transmit the data over the "last mile" of Internet pipes into American homes.
• Netflix now accounts for 20 percent of all broadband traffic during peak hours, according to the analytics firm Sandvine. And analysts say it has propelled a recent wave of cable subscription losses.

2 more annotations...

• Those issues cut to the heart of Comcast’s imminent acquisition of NBC Universal, which is in the final stages of review by the F.C.C. and the Justice Department.
• In theory, without government action, Comcast could speed up streams of NBC programs and slow down streams of its rivals’ programs. “This may be one of those teaching moments for consumers to understand what’s at stake,” said Michael McGuire, a media analyst for Gartner.
• A recent study found that at peak times, Netflix represented 20 percent of Internet download traffic in the United States. That makes it a de facto competitor for incumbent distributors like Comcast and Time Warner Cable
• If nothing else, the dispute demonstrates that consumers have little, if any, idea how convoluted it can be to transmit video to a computer or mobile phone.

2 more annotations...

•  I also like how Poland parses Netflix’s business model, which he describes as an “everything everywhere” model rather than a model focused on the most recent movies, and Poland offers some pretty good data to back that up.
• there is still some debate about whether studios stand to benefit more by working with cable TV providers because subscription TV may actually pay more initially
• Netflix has continued to buy the rights to stream films, especially from independent film distributors
• Some good news on Net Neutrality.  Michael Copps, one of the Democratic-leaning FCC committee members has strongly hinted that he will not support the watered-down version of net neutrality currently being proposed.  Copps’ support is probably necessary, so this may give supporters of an open internet a little more leverage in their fight.
• But one of the biggest concerns–and one that extends well beyond Netflix to anyone concerned with an open internet–is the issue of net neutrality.
• Like David Poland, I am somewhat skeptical of this attempt to paint Netflix as an industry threat, however.
• As the Times article cited above notes, Comcast could stream NBC shows more quickly than programs produced by their rivals unless the government intervenes.

5 more annotations...

• The top U.S. telecommunications regulator on Wednesday endorsed the idea that broadband providers could charge extra for providing heavy Internet users with lots of online video or data-heavy services such as videogames.
• Mr. Genachowski's support for pay-as-you-go pricing represents a victory for cable and telecommunications companies because it clarified whether broadband providers had the power to charge by what users consumed.
• Last April, Time Warner Cable Inc. shelved its tests of usage-based pricing after a consumer outcry and pressure from some lawmakers.
• he advent of usage-based pricing could harm the development of the Internet, say critics
• A coalition of Internet companies, including Facebook Inc. and Google Inc., and public interest groups said they will work to limit broadband providers' ability to extract extra payments for faster delivery.
• The FCC's two Republican members blasted the proposal.
• In May, Mr. Genachowski suggested re-regulating Internet lines would give the FCC clearer authority to act as an Internet traffic cop, reversing a 2002 decision that deregulated them. At the time, Mr. Genachowski said he had little choice because the agency didn't have legal authority as things stood.
• He has since made an about-face on that issue, saying Wednesday the agency has "a sound legal basis" for acting as an Internet traffic cop without re-regulating Internet lines.
• Details about Mr. Genachowski's proposal remain scarce

7 more annotations...

• The source could not access the item remotely (from home at close to midnight) but it is expected to be similar to a compromise net neutrality legislative proposal hammered out with stakeholders by Energy & Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.).
• but do so under the FCC's existing Title I definition of Internet access rather than the Title II reclassification the chairman initially proposed, then apparently disposed of when it became obvious it was a "nuclear option," opposed not only by industry but virtually all House Republicans and more than two dozen Democrats.
• Senators John Kerry (D-Mass.), Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)
• But we believe you are headed toward a principled center and we support that effort."

2 more annotations...

• Hutchison's ammendment is to a bill for military and veterans construction projects.

• Craig Moffett, an analyst at Bernstein Research, wrote in a note to investors Tuesday morning that the agency's approval of pay-as-you-go broadband access "can't be overstated."
• This, analysts say, could be a way for cable firms to prevent users from "cutting the cord," or canceling their television services.
• Netflix has argued against paid prioritization of services that would allow a carrier to prioritize their own content or that of partners over streaming Internet content such as Netflix's videos

1 more annotation...