[Air-l] net neutrality

Janna Anderson andersj at elon.edu
Thu Apr 27 08:38:55 PDT 2006


April 26, 2006 
Net Neutrality Debate Heats Up
By Roy Mark/JupiterMedia's Internetnews.com
 
WASHINGTON - Looking at possible antitrust implications of having telecoms
and cable companies controlling 99 percent of U.S. broadband connections, a
special task force of the House Judiciary Committee took up network
neutrality. 

Like other committees that have heard testimony on network neutrality, the
Judiciary panel heard conflicting interpretations on whether legislation is
needed to ward off discrimination by broadband providers.

Verizon and AT&T have publicly stated they intend to charge content
providers different fees based on bandwidth consumption to access consumers,
but will not block, degrade or impair delivery of the content to consumers.
Tech companies and a growing coalition of consumer groups contend the plan
amounts to discrimination since those who can pay the broadband providers'
rates will have a competitive advantage over those who can't.

"All sides of the net neutrality debate agree that consumers should be
control of their Internet experience," Walter McCormick of the U.S. Telecom
Association said. "Where we differ is on whether consumers alone should foot
the bill for the advanced networks that drive the Internet's growth and
evolution." 

McCormick said Internet content providers seeking to profit on new
high-speed fiber networks should not expect a free pass on all costs
associated with the increased bandwidth capacity to deliver services and
applications. 

"If you want more, then you pay more, is as American as it comes," he said.
"It is a straightforward market proposition. As companies move into live
video and gaming and advanced services, they will be seeking more
bandwidth." 

Columbia University Professor Tim Wu spun it another way.

"It's as if the electric company one day announced that refrigerators made
by General Electric would henceforth not work quite as well as those made by
Samsung," Wu said. "That would be a shock, because when it comes to the
electric grid and the Internet, people are used to a network that they are
free to use as they wish."

Wu said the issue of network neutrality is really an issue about market
power concentration.

"Whatever AT&T and others may claim as motives, the potential for abuse of
market power is obvious to everyone," he said. "Ninety-four percent of
Americans have either zero, one or two choices for broadband access. Many of
us wish things were otherwise, but they are not."

Given the concentration of market power between the telcos and the cable
companies, Wu said it was clear AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and other power
players coiuld make more money by distorting competition between Internet
firms. 

"It [AT&T] can, through implicit threats of degradation, extract a kind of
protection money for those with the resources to pay up," Wu said. "It's
basically the Tony Soprano model of networking, and while it makes sense for
whoever is in a position to make threats, it isn't particularly good for the
nation's economy, innovation or consumer welfare."

The House Judiciary debate came on the eve of a vote in the House Commerce
Committee on the Communications Opportunity, Promotion and Efficiency Act of
2006 (COPE). 

The centerpiece of COPE is national video franchising for IPTV providers
such as Verizon and AT&T. With the goal of increasing competition in the pay
television market, the proposal enjoys wide support on both sides of the
aisle. 

More controversial is network neutrality.

Republicans see little problem with the tiered access approach proposed by
the telecoms and leave enforcement of network neutrality violations to the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

Democrats and a growing coalition of tech companies and consumer groups,
want the FCC's network neutrality principles, which have no force of law,
turned into statutory law. Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) is expected to propose
an amendment to COPE to do just that.

A similar proposal three weeks ago was handily defeated by the Republicans,
23-8. 



On 4/27/06 11:33 AM, "Nancy Baym" <nbaym at ku.edu> wrote:

> Can someone with greater expertise than mine offer a quick primer on
> the net neutrality debate and bills now before the US
> congress/senate, including how, if at all, it would have
> ramifications outside the US? I know there are many people on here
> who pay a lot of attention to these kinds of issues, and I would
> really like to hear what you see going on here,
> 
> Thanks,
> Nancy
> _______________________________________________
> The air-l at listserv.aoir.org mailing list
> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org
> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at:
> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
> 
> Join the Association of Internet Researchers:
> http://www.aoir.org/

-- 
Janna Quitney Anderson
Assistant Professor of Communications
Director of Internet Projects
School of Communications
Elon University
andersj at elon.edu
(336) 278-5733 (o)
(336) 446-0486 (h)




More information about the Air-L mailing list