The FCC Rearranges The Field Goal Posts On The Internet Neutrality Field

The idea of Internet neutrality in terms of access and speed has been an ongoing debate for a number of years, especially in the last two as a number of the big Internet service providers, or ISPs, have been curtailing the general flow of traffic through their systems with “pay to play” costing models.  

These models have essentially restructured Internet accounts, charging significantly more per month to those customers that draw down significantly more bandwidth than the average customers. Marketed as a way of making sure that video watcher, gamers, businesses and consumers of large data flow pay their way, the model has gained traction.  

Further, many large website companies are now redesigning pricing models to favor paying customers over freebies or low cost users, speeding up paid premium accounts at the expense of everyone else’s throughput. No surprise, the Federal Communications Commission, or FCC, finally decided to weigh in. 

The Vote 

In a 3-2 vote drawn on party lines the FCC approved new open Internet neutrality rules. These rules are intended, according to FCC chairman Tom Wheeler, to confirm that every user has open access to the Internet, regardless of being an individual or a business. While these are very broad, nice-sounding words, the devil is in the details for both sides of the picture. At stake is exactly how or under what parameters the Internet, at least in the U.S., should operate. ISPs are the first and foremost impact under the new regulatory ruling because they are predominantly the access point where everyone starts their usage. 

History 

Ironically, the new regulation is not that “new.” In 2010 the FCC first visited the issue of Net neutrality when it put in place rules that affected access through broadband, the faster and more widely preferred method of Internet access today for the masses. However, Verizon pushed back legally, and the U.S. Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia finally decided that the FCC reached to far, going past its authority and asserting a role it didn’t have under law over broadband per se.  

That, of course, sent the regulatory staff back to the drawing board on how to assert Net neutrality with different wording that was within the FCC’s existing authority. The trick was determined by reclassifying ISPs under Title II of the Telecommunications Act. That in turn placed ISPs under the same onus as public utilities in terms of oversight by the government. 

Critics to the latest move by the FCC note the typical business mantra – the ruling will limit creativity of business and technology, it will raise costs on all consumers, imposes telephone era regulation that will slow down the industry unnecessarily, and that the changes will generally be economically destructive. The only reason the change was made, according to one FCC Republican member (Commissioner Ajut Pai), was because the President wanted it done. 

Restraints 

Proponents harbored around the theme that the change reinforces and confirms that the Internet cannot be transformed in terms of access into a full “pay to play” pricing system. This will significantly restrain the ability for ISPs at least to favor premium payers over others, reducing one group’s access speed to favor another that produces more business revenue per month or service cycle. 

However, neither side has fully analyzed the new rules in detail and how each regulatory intricacy will work. That will take time and, in some cases, implementation before the real results become visible and measurable. Interestingly, the FCC handled the release of the details in a manner that was similar to the passage of Health Care Reform. A refusal to disclose all of the exact details of the change echoed Senator Barbara Boxer’s words, “But we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what's in it.” All 332 pages were included in the FCC’s decision without public display or input. 

Katrina is a product specialist for RackSolutions, the market leader for designing and manufacturing custom racking products for the IT industry! She blogs regularly about IT here.