November 12, 2013

Origins of the Net Neutrality Debate

Coalition of Broadband Users and Innovators (CBUI) sent a letter to FCC Chairman Michael Powell in November 2002

It included the phrase “net neutrality” coined by Tim Wu in an article written in 2002 and published in 2003

CBUI called for “nondiscrimination safeguards” to guarantee net neutrality

What is Net Neutrality?

“Net neutrality simply means that all like Internet content must be treated alike and move at the same speed over the network. The owners of the Internet’s wires cannot discriminate. This is the simple but brilliant “end-to-end” design of the Internet that has made it such a powerful force for economic and social good.”

Lawrence Lessig and Robert W. McChesney, “No Tolls on the Internet,” Washington Post, June 8, 2006.

Ask a Ninja’s “What is Net Neutrality?” video

Eli Noam’s Possible Meanings No different quality grades for service No price discrimination among Internet providers No monopoly price charged to content and

application providers No discrimination against content providers who

compete with carrier’s own content No selectivity by the carriers over the content

that they transmit No blocking of the access of users to some

websites

Congress and the FCC Encourage Telephone and Cable to Compete

Telecom Act of 1996 FCC decisions to permit telephone

companies to buy cable networks and cable operators to compete in telephone markets

FCC wanted telcos and cable companies to compete in high-speed Internet and cable TV services via new fiber optic networks built without government subsidies

Top ISPs in the USA (2011)

Comcast Time Warner AT&T Cox Optimum Charter Verizon

Source: http://isp-review.toptenreviews.com/

Cable operators

Telephone companies

Top Global Web Sites (2011) Google Facebook YouTube Yahoo! Wikipedia Baidu Blogspot Twitter

Michael Powell’s Internet Freedoms, 2004

freedom to access content freedom to use applications freedom to attach personal devices freedom to obtain service plan

information

FCC Policy Statement 2005 consumers are entitled to access the lawful Internet content of their choice

consumers are entitled to run applications and services of their choice, subject to the needs of law enforcement

consumers are entitled to connect their choice of legal devices that do not harm the network

consumers are entitled to competition among network providers, application and service providers, and content providers

Proponents’ Videos

Tim WuSave the InternetVint Cerf

Arguments of Proponents

End-to-end architecture of the Internet must be preserved

This means preventing discrimination by conduit companies against content and services that they do not control

Conduit companies will reserve lots of bandwidth for services like cable TV which will degrade Internet performance for everyone else

Vint Cerf

More Arguments of Proponents There is insufficient competition

between cable operators and telcos to guarantee non-discrimination

There is a potential for violations of freedom of speech in the absence of net neutrality guarantees

Gigi Sohn LarryLessig

TimBerners-Lee

Organizations that Supported Net Neutrality ACLU ALA Christian Coalition Gun Owners of America Consumers Union Google, Amazon, Yahoo! American Electronics Association

The Opponents’ Perspective on Net Neutrality NCTA anti-NN ad Fox News coverage Glenn Beck

David Farber

Arguments of Opponents

Net neutrality guarantees constitute unnecessary regulation

The threat of discrimination is overblown Cable and telephone companies need new

revenues to build out the network Need to have “intelligent networks” to

obtain “quality of service” Competition is sufficient to prevent

abuses

The Video Franchise Bill, 2006 Attempts by Democrats led by Ed

Markey in the House to add net neutrality amendments failed in committee and on the floor

Net neutrality amendment proposed by Senator Olympia Snowe (R-ME) failed to pass in an 11-11 committee vote

Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) voted against the amendment

Ted Stevens’ Tubes Statement “And again, the Internet is not something you just dump something on. It's not a big truck. It's a series of tubes. And if you don't understand those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and it's going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material, enormous amounts of material. “

June 28, 2006

Series of Tubes Remix

Popular Reaction to Ted Stevens statement

Telecom Lobbying Money Spent in the First Half of 2006Category Specific Firms and

OrganizationAmount in $

millions

Telephone Interests

AT&T, Verizon, BellSouth, and USTA

30.3

Cable Interests Comcast, Time Warner, Cox, and NCTA

12.2

Internet Interests

Google, Yahoo!, eBay, Microsoft, Amazon.com

8.8

Total 51.3

Wyden Saves the Day

Ron Wyden used his Senatorial privilege to place a hold on the Video Franchise bill because of the lack of net neutrality guarantees. Since Ted Stevens did not have the 60 votes needed to override Wyden’s hold, the bill was not put up for a vote on the Senate floor.

Barack Obama Supports Net Neutrality Speech on net neutrality at Google in 2007 Net neutrality becomes part of the official

Democratic party platform in 2008 Obama appoints Julius Genachowski as

head of the FCC in 2009 American Recovery and Investment Act of

2009 provides $7.2 billion for broadband infrastructure and mandates that the FCC prepare a National Broadband Plan

Genachowski Adds Two Items to FCC Policy Statement of 2005 “broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications”

• “providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management processes.”

Video of Genachowski

The National Broadband Plan FCC announced intention to guarantee net

neutrality in spite of Comcast ruling in 2009

Genachowski spoke of a “third way” between “heavy-handed prescriptive regulation” and the “light-touch approach” of the past

FCC would attempt to reclassify transmission component of broadband as a “telecommunication service”

Comcast Throttling of Bit-Torrent Traffic in 2007 Robb Topolski discovers delays in delivery of

Bit-Torrent files for his barber shop quartet Topolski publishes this on TorrentFreak blog EFF and AP verify independently Comcast eventually admits that it was “traffic

shaping” using an application called Sandvine that prevents “seeding”

The FCC told Comcast to stop doing this Comcast complied but appealed to courts

The Comcast Ruling of 2010 US Circuit Court of Appeals of DC ruled

on April 6, 2010, that the FCC did not have the authority to regulate ISPs under the Telecom Act of 1996 (therefore Comcast was not bound to obey FCC rules regarding traffic management)

Ruling was based on FCC decision to reclassify cable modems and DSL as information services

Verizon-Google Agreement In August 2010, Verizon and Google

announced a joint policy proposal The jist of it was:

Telecom companies agree to net neutrality on their wired networks

Internet firms agree that net neutrality rules will not apply to wireless networks

Both agree that reasonable traffic management is permissible on both wired and wireless networks

Verizon Challenge to FCC Open Internet Order (2013) Verizon argues in a suit before the US Court

of Appeals that the FCC overstepped its authority in reclassifying Internet service in its Open Internet Order and violating Verizon’s 1st and 5th amendment rights

In May 2013, the Supreme Court ruled that agencies have authority to regulate when legislation is ambiguous

Two of the Court of Appeals judges are opposed to treating all content equally but no ruling yet

New FCC Chair

New Chair, Ted Wheeler as of October 2013 Telecom lobbyist background Hired Gigi Sohn for policy advice

Conclusions Net neutrality was framed by Republicans as a

regulatory issue. Democratic framing was confusing. Republicans and their supporters carried the day until

June 2006 when the political tide began turn against them.

The 2006 and 2008 election results meant that Democrats and their allies would attempt to pass legislation guaranteeing net neutrality.

However, the Comcast ruling and strong Republican opposition to net neutrality made legislative action very unlikely. It is still not clear whether the FCC strategy to reclassify broadband transmission will work.