Local stakes are high on ‘net neutrality’

On the Web, often referred to as the high-tech version of the Wild West – a place of few laws or regulations – Internet service providers hold lots of power.
Telephone, cable and wireless ISPs are the gatekeepers for millions of computer and smartphone users, with the ability to control access or the speed of access to certain content on their broadband networks.
Now the Federal Communications Commission is moving to regulate that power with so-called “net neutrality” rules that would require ISPs to treat all online content providers equally.
While net neutrality long has been a contentious subject, supporters and critics have ratcheted up the debate since the FCC released its draft rules in October. The public comment section of the rule-making process was due to end Jan. 14.
Supporters of the neutrality rules – including content providers Google Inc. and Microsoft Corp. – argue the rules are needed to ensure that the Internet remains “free and open.”
The FCC says the rules would permit “reasonable” network management, and would allow ISPs to block illegal content or halt harmful or unwanted Web traffic, such as spam.
But the opposition, led by telecommunication companies such as AT&T Inc., Verizon Communications Inc. and Comcast Corp., insists the potential regulation is unnecessary and will hinder innovation and investment in the sector.
In addition, representatives of the wireless industry insist that the neutrality rules should not apply to them because the constricted wireless spectrum requires the management of data, or else the pipelines can grow too congested.
“This could cause harm to an industry that is doing quite well,” said Chris Guttman-McCabe, vice president for regulatory affairs for the wireless-industry group CTIA. “With these rules comes uncertainty in an industry that is driving employment, driving innovation and driving investment.”
The FCC has spent recent months collecting public comments on the draft rules. Now public forums are slated for the coming months before staff members formulate a recommendation to present to the commission, according to an agency spokesman. No timetable has been set. But with much riding on the FCC rules, telecommunication companies with a local presence – and others – are watching the proceedings closely.
“Like everyone else, we’re still reviewing the FCC’s proposed rule-making on network management,” said Cox spokeswoman Amy Quinn in an e-mail last week. “And it’s too early to say what the impact would be. Our main focus has always been, and will continue to be, our customers and how we can best meet their needs.”
Quinn added that Cox would “urge the commission to be careful not to adopt regulations that will discourage investment in broadband networks.”
Cox acknowledged it had been testing a new method of managing data traffic on its high-speed networks in Kansas and Arkansas earlier this year, tests that finished in October.
It was unclear whether the system would have violated future FCC rules, but Cox doesn’t plan to move forward with it, Quinn said.
“We believe the results of our trial may inform policymakers in the FCC’s network- management proceedings, and to that end, plan to submit comment into the FCC’s record,” she added.
Rhode Island’s top utilities regulator has publicly chimed in on net neutrality.
Elia Germani, chairman of the R.I. Public Utilities Commission, expressed his concern about the potential rules in a letter to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski in October, even before the agency sought public comment.
“It is imperative that we maintain the continued investment by phone, cable cellular, electric and other providers in broadband networks that will ensure healthy competition and continue to drive down prices,” Germani wrote. “I fear that any new network neutrality regulation could severely impede that spirit of innovation and entrepreneurship that is the hallmark of the existing telecommunications marketplace.”
Approval of neutrality rules would mark a major shift in U.S. policy, which deregulated high-speed modem services in 2002. Five years later, mobile broadband and DSL were deregulated, too.
For several years, the FCC had four Internet principles that provided the ISPs with voluntary guidelines on Web openness. The issue of net neutrality became the focus of renewed attention in 2007, when it was revealed that telecom giant Comcast was slowing or blocking some file-sharing that was distributing large amounts of data on its network. The FCC reprimanded Comcast for violating its principles.
Then in the 2008 presidential campaign, then-candidate Barack Obama promised to support network neutrality regulations. And Obama-appointed Genachowski pushed the issue forward, despite reluctance from two – both Republicans — of the five FCC commissioners.
Supporters of net neutrality say, among other things, that they’re worried that without regulation, ISPs will favor some companies that could afford to pay for priority access, leaving smaller business unable to compete.
Comments left on the FCC’s OpenInternet.gov Web site appeared last week to be largely in favor of the agency enacting ISP regulation.
“The only people who would be against net neutral legislation would be those who stand to lose money from it,” wrote a person identified as david.ddrew. “Don’t let anyone tell you this is about the government controlling your Internet. This is about companies trying to control your Internet.”
But Guttman-McCabe, from the wireless industry group CTIA, insisted last week that the FCC rules could significantly hurt the mobile network providers – and in turn consumers – if they are treated the same as the fixed ISPs, which have much larger data pipelines. Network management is needed to avoid a clogged wireless spectrum, he said.
“Wireless is different,” Guttman-McCabe said. “We can’t just make a fatter pipeline.”
Middletown-based, fixed wireless Internet provider Towerstream Corp. says that it will remain unaffected by net neutrality rules, in part because it is able to plan for high data usage when the company sets up its WiMax service in new markets.
“We’ve planned net neutrality into our network,” said Jeff Thompson, the company’s CEO. “We don’t need to shape the traffic; we’re not a mobile network.” •