Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
As of Friday, June 12, the Internet is legally an open, unbiased network in the United States. Well, to be fair, it has been pretty open and unbiased, but now the net neutrality ruling is coming into effect.
Net neutrality rules were published by the Federal Communications Commission April 13, and the two-month waiting period for them to become effective ends today. The ruling is being appealed by Internet Service Providers (ISPs) like AT&T and Verizon, which will likely take months if not years if it has to go to the Supreme Court. In the meantime, ISPs asked the courts to halt parts of the ruling until there is a verdict on the appeal (in legal terms, this halt request is called a stay request), but that request was denied today. So net neutrality now becomes enforceable by the FCC. Will consumers benefit?
I have read the 400-page document of the ruling and talked to expert lawyers, industry executives and academics, trying to piece the puzzle together to answer this question. So this is the first of several articles on this topic. I wish the answer was straightforward, but as in most major rulings, the answer is mixed. Consumers will benefit in some ways, but they will lose in other ways. Here’s how.
The ruling provides rules of engagement for ISPs (defined in the ruling as Broadband Internet Access Services or BIAS) who deliver Internet content via a mobile, satellite, or fixed cable connection. One of the main issues at hand is that many of these providers have a monopoly of the last mile of cable to your home. The spirit of the ruling is to make sure that these providers give fair access and delivery of Internet content, so that the Internet remains an open access network.
The ruling has two core components. The first major ruling is that ISPs now fall under the category of telecommunications services (as opposed to information services), so they are bound by the regulations of Title II of the Telecommunications Act of 1934, which provides the FCC the authority to regulate them as a public utility. This is a major development with substantial implications on the future of the industry. It is at the core of the appeal by the ISPs, so let’s leave it for a future post and focus on what is not being disputed by the ISPs.
The second major part of the ruling is the development of so-called bright-line rules, which directly affect a consumer’s ability to access content over the Internet. Although they now go into effect and the denial of the stay request today increases the chance of these rules ultimately passing, it is awkward that they could still get lost in the appeals process. According to J.G. Harrington, attorney at Cooley LLP, “it is uncertain whether the rules that were not in the stay request will eventually survive all the legal challenges. But the fact that the stay request was denied increases the odds that these bright-line rules will survive the appeal process.”
The bright-line rules basically compel ISPs to provide non-discriminatory access of legal Internet content to consumers and also give content providers (known as edge providers in the ruling; e.g., Netflix NFLX -0.8%, Facebook) equitable access to the ISP broadband network in order to deliver the content. These bright-line rules are:
- No Blocking: ISPs cannot block access to legal content
- No Throttling: ISPs cannot throttle (slow down) delivery of legal content.
- No Paid Prioritization: ISPs cannot charge content providers for priority service to deliver content to consumers.
Benefits to Consumers
The FCC believes these three bright-line rules will protect the virtuous cycle of industry investment and innovation in Internet content and hardware infrastructure and ensure there is fair access to consumers for what they pay for: Access to all locations of the Internet where there is legal content they want access to; and for content providers, fair access to the ISP’s network so that the content can be delivered to the consumer. To enforce these rules, the ISPs are ordered to provide transparency to consumers and content providers about the services received and the network management practices.
Notice the non-discriminatory rules apply only to legal content, which leaves the door open for ISPs to block or throttle illegal content, providing a new avenue to combat piracy and cybercrime. Prior to this, regulators disapproved throttling of any content, including illegal content that violates copyright.
Yepp. Rough days for armchair quarterbacks ahead...He's all bent because his granny might have to pay more so he can play online computer games.
I don't know if it is possible to misunderstand a regulation more.
Are you clutching your pearls really tight right now, TK?
If there are two people in the world who can really, really, really misunderstand something, then it's TK and jroc.
I don't know if it is possible to misunderstand a regulation more.
He's all bent because his granny might have to pay more so he can play online computer games.
I don't know if it is possible to misunderstand a regulation more.
Given how much you misunderstand things? I think you're the one who misunderstood. Your bill will explain it to you.
Look at who is objecting to this - the providers. The ones you buy your internet from.
Do you really think they object to net neutrality because they think it will prevent them from charging you LESS?
Porn is utilizing the capacity to the full.
