EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Net Neutrality -- The Fight Ahead
"The Day the Internet Lost" read a full-banner headline at the front of Huffington Post yesterday. The New York Times held a wake for the Internet reporting that Internet service providers can now "block or slow specific sites" and demand that content producers now "pay a fee to ensure delivery of material."
Yesterday, the DC Circuit court took away the Federal Communications Commission's role as consumer watchdog, protecting our rights on the Internet. The decision has been widely reported as the end of an era for America's Internet. But what does the future hold? And what can we do to keep the Internet open and democratic?
The ruling sounds an echo of the Supreme Court's Citizens United v. FEC decision. That ruling in January amounted to a judicial giveaway of our democracy to powerful corporations. Yesterday's court decision effectively hands the future of communications over to corporations like AT&T, Comcast, Verizon and Time Warner Cable.
This is bad news on several fronts:
Broadband Ambitions Sidelined: High-speed Internet access is a central component to our economic recovery. Putting high-speed Internet into the hands of the third of the country that now does not connect is Priority #1 of the FCC's National Broadband Plan. The court decision pulls the carpet from beneath the agency's plan, effectively leaving this essential job to companies that have failed -- by almost every international measure -- to deliver a fast and affordable services to Americans stuck on the wrong side of the digital divide.
The End of Openness: The decision could mark the beginning of America's Broadband Dark Age. The court ruled that the FCC has no right to stop carriers from developing a two-tier Internet and blocking Web content that they don't like. They've already indicated their interest in prioritizing content they like at the expense of everybody else. As The Economist reported yesterday an ISP could simply "decide to hijack all search queries... and redirect them to its own search site so it could harvest the extra hits, even when users were attempting to use Google or other search engines." Nice!
It's Now Their Internet, Not Yours: The decision could bring us a world where Internet users no longer have control over their Internet experience -- where we have no protections against ISPs that abuse our Internet rights at will and without repercussions. Increasingly AT&T, Comcast and Verizon have sought to encroach upon user choice online. Net Neutrality is essential to keeping the future of communications in the hands of all Americans -- and preventing ISPs from picking winners and losers on the Web. We've just lost that guarantee and it's only a matter of time before the Great Encroachment begins.
But don't give up hope. There's a way out of this legal mess. The easiest route to restore an open Internet is for the FCC to simply vote to reclassify broadband under Title 2 of the Communications Act. This move would return to the agency the powers to protect consumers that it had before Bush-era deregulation struck it down.
Other remedies include a Supreme Court appeal or congressional legislation but, as Prof. Jack Balkin notes, such actions run the risk of a conservative Supreme Court that appears to favor corporations over the public interest. And a move in Congress would require 60 votes from a Senate where passing anything is nearly impossible - much less on an issue over which broadband providers like AT&T and Comcast wield a corrupting level of influence in both parties.
The FCC, however, could reclassify by a simple majority vote of commissioners. Chairman Genachowski has made protecting the open Internet a signature effort of his tenure. He has the support of the majority of FCC commissioners on that. He should now move to reclassify with a simple vote at the agency.
Moreover, the Supreme Court case has specifically said the decision to reclassify is up to the FCC, and as long as the Commission gives good reasons for its choice to do so, that action should be upheld in the courts.
Makes sense, right? That's why Free Press is pushing full throttle to embolden the FCC to reclassify in a way that allows it to protect Net Neutrality and fulfill the universal access goals envisioned in its National Broadband Plan. (You can join the action here)
In the world of wonky telecommunications policy, reclassification -- or returning the Internet to its legal status prior to Bush-era deregulation -- is tantamount to declaring World War III with the phone and cable lobby.
That's a fight that we're ready to have right now. The future of open communications depends upon it.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


8 Comments so far
Show AllI signed an email campaign letter-to-Congress-Dalek this morning, but find I no longer have the contact info to distribute it.
Anyone?
Net neutrality is very important. I signed the "You can join the action here" petition linked in the article, and here's a link to EFF for more info re net neutrality and the court decision:
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/04/court-rejects-fcc-authority-over-internet
Everyone wants net neutrality. There's not a single person unless they are part of some big corporation that wants the net in the hands of the few.
The internet is OURS. And I speak for everyone except these corporations when I say that.
Yes, but be careful about people who might look like allies.
The Tea Party has a proposed plank called "internet freedom" which states: "No regulation or tax on the internet." [sic]**
But of course, a truly neutral network would require government regulation, and true "internet freedom" would be the freedom of the owner of the servers to allocate use of those servers to some individuals and not others.
And considering that ultimately, only a public network of public servers, like public roadways, will guarantee net neutrality, a tax may eventually be a good idea too.
**Go here: http://www.thecontract.org/
Internet freedom means freedom for the end user, not the corporation nor the owner of the node.
That I have to explain something that everybody knows means I am dealing with a troll.
No, we don't need or want a tax. No we don't want the corruptible government taking corporate bribes and taxing the little guy into the ground while corporate drones pump commercials over the free net. The government has proved repeatedly that it is a completely incompetent custodian of public welfare and safety in most areas they get involved with.
The net right now is a level playing field for all, except Comcast and AT&T customers who suffer censorship and speed discrimination. We don't want telecoms in charge of OUR internet.
TJ
It was actually the Telecommunications Act of 1996, signed by President Bill Clinton, that designated ISPs as information service providers and so exempted them from certain telecom regulations.
I'm not saying anything good happened at the FCC during Bush's tenure, but the 1996 Telecom Act was a real assault on the public interest. And it was signed into law by Clinton, beloved by loyalist Dems, but a true Republican-style corporatist.
-TIA
Out here in Asia, my ISP is already blocking CD saying that it's IP Address "121.97.45.2 has been banned".
I just petitioned the FCC Commissioner Chairman Genachowski. Please, everybody do it.
https://secure.freepress.net/site/Advocacy?
cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=437
I hope this posts.
TJ
Where in Asia?
And how are you on CD now, through a proxy?