The end of net neutrality is officially here
Changes are coming for the way the U.S. government regulates the internet. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) narrowly voted to dismantle the controversial 2015 Obama-era net neutrality internet regulations — which imposed utility-style regulations on internet service providers (ISPs), which prevented them from blocking, speeding up, or slowing down access to specific online services — in December. Their repeal became official on Monday as part of the FCC’s effort to provide an open Internet while paving the way for better, faster and cheaper Internet access for consumers. On Monday, the FCC implemented the “Restoring Internet Freedom Order,” saying the order “replaces unnecessary, heavy-handed regulations dating back to 1934 with strong consumer protections, increased transparency and common-sense regulations that will promote investment and broadband deployment.” “The 2015 decision to impose these heavy-handed utility-style regulations on the internet was a mistake,” FCC chairman Ajit Pai said in a video, explaining the rules were a “solution in search of a problem” when in fact “the Internet wasn’t broken.” The Internet is “the greatest free-market success story in history,” Pai wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed published in November. Regulations “designed in the 1930s to tame the Ma Bell telephone monopoly” are hurting investment, he argued in the piece. What is net neutrality? Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers treat all data on the Internet the same, and not discriminate or charge differently by user, content, website, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or method of communication. Intent of the Restoring Internet Freedom Order The FCC’s framework for protecting Internet freedom has three key parts: Consumer ProtectionThe Federal Trade Commission will police and take action against Internet service providers for anticompetitive acts or unfair and deceptive practices. The FTC is the nation’s premier consumer protection agency, and until the FCC stripped it of jurisdiction over Internet service providers in 2015, the FTC protected consumers consistently across the Internet economy. TransparencyA critical part of Internet openness involves Internet service providers being transparent about their business practices. That’s why the FCC has imposed enhanced transparency requirements. Internet service providers must publicly disclose information regarding their network management practices, performance, and commercial terms of service. These disclosures must be made via a publicly available, easily accessible company website or through the FCC’s website. This will discourage harmful practices and help regulators target any problematic conduct. These disclosures also support innovation, investment, and competition by ensuring that entrepreneurs and other small businesses have the technical information necessary to create and maintain online content, applications, services, and devices. Internet Service Providers must clearly disclose their network management practices on their own web sites or with the FCC. For more information about these disclosures, you can visit https://www.fcc.gov/isp-disclosures. Removes Unnecessary Regulations to Promote Broadband Investment The Internet wasn’t broken in 2015, when the previous FCC imposed 1930s-era regulations (known as “Title II”) on Internet service providers. And ironically, these regulations made things worse by limiting investment in high-speed networks and slowing broadband deployment. Under Title II, broadband network investment dropped more than 5.6% — the first time a decline has happened outside of a recession. The effect was particularly serious for smaller Internet service providers—fixed wireless companies, small-town cable operators, municipal broadband providers, electric cooperatives, and others—that don’t have the resources or lawyers to navigate a thicket of complex rules. Removing these outdated and unnecessary regulations will create a strong incentive for companies to pour resources into building better online infrastructure across the country and bringing faster, better, and cheaper Internet access to more Americans. Alabama opposition Upon arriving to the U.S. Sen, newly elected Sen. Doug Jones made quick on his campaign promises to fight to restore net neutrality provisions. In January, he co-sponsored resolution aimed to do just that — overturn Pai’s decision to repeal net neutrality. “A free and open internet is crucial for our nation to remain a leader in the global economy, provide our children a quality education, and promote freedom of speech,” Jones said in a statement. “Repealing the Open Internet Order would allow companies to raise the price of internet access and discriminate against certain internet traffic. Restoring net neutrality is the right thing to do to protect Alabama consumers and to provide an equitable platform for companies of all sizes to compete for their customers.” Senate Democrats managed to pass the resolution in May. It has now moved to the House for consideration, but it faces an an uphill battle. Whether or not repeal of net neutrality has adverse effects on consumers, or actually helps, remains to be seen.
Good on his word, Doug Jones co-sponsors bill to protect net neutrality
Alabama’s newest senator, Democrat Doug Jones is wasting no time getting to work in Washington, D.C. During the campaign, Jones asserted his support of net neutrality. On Tuesday, he made good on his word by announcing he will co-sponsor legislation to repeal the Federal Communications Commission‘s (FCC) decision to end its policy of net neutrality, also known as the Open Internet Order. I strongly support #NetNeutrality and believe every Alabamian should have access to a free and open internet.https://t.co/3XZ9ikWGaa — Doug Jones (@GDouglasJones) November 28, 2017 “A free and open internet is crucial for our nation to remain a leader in the global economy, provide our children a quality education, and promote freedom of speech,” Jones said in a statement. “Repealing the Open Internet Order would allow companies to raise the price of internet access and discriminate against certain internet traffic. Restoring net neutrality is the right thing to do to protect Alabama consumers and to provide an equitable platform for companies of all sizes to compete for their customers.” Jones’ sponsorship comes in the wake of the FCC’s December vote in favor of Chairman Ajit Pai’s plan to roll back the net neutrality regulations, which prevented internet service providers like AT&T and Verizon from slowing down certain content or requiring websites to pay for faster speeds. Now, in order to save net neutrality and counter the FCC’s decision to give internet providers the ability to slow or block some websites while speeding up others, Senate lawmakers must pass a resolution to repeal the new regulations under the Congressional Review Act (CRA), all within a 60-day window that began on Dec. 14. Under the CRA, resolutions allow Congress to overturn regulatory actions at federal agencies with a simple majority vote in both chambers. In accordance with the CRA, the U.S. Senate will formally introduce the resolution after the rule is submitted to both houses of Congress and published in the Federal Register, and then force a vote within 60 legislative days. Currently, Senate Democrats, who are leading the efforts, have recruited 50 votes in the Senate — all Democrats with one lone Republican to their side. They need one more Republican to join them to avoid a tiebreaker that would be decided by Vice President Mike Pence. Being a Republican, Pence would vote on the side of the FCC, thus shutting down the effort for good.
Comcast abandons Time Warner bid after government pushback
What killed Comcast’s $45 billion bid for Time Warner Cable? Regulators’ desire to protect the Internet video industry that’s reshaping TV. A combination of the No. 1 and No. 2 U.S. cable companies would have put nearly 30 percent of TV and about 55 percent of broadband subscribers under one roof, along with NBCUniversal, giving the resulting behemoth unprecedented power over what Americans watch and download. Competitors, consumer groups, and politicians have criticized the deal, saying it would lead to higher prices and less choice. “The proposed merger would have posed an unacceptable risk to competition and innovation, including to the ability of online video providers to reach and serve consumers,” Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler said in a written statement. The Justice Department said that Comcast dropped its bid because of regulators’ concerns that the Philadelphia-based cable giant would become an “unavoidable gatekeeper” for Internet services. One of the concerns consumer advocates and competitors had with the Comcast deal was that it could undermine the streaming video industry that is reshaping TV. Comcast could, for example, require onerous payments from new online-only video providers for connecting to its network. Dish, the satellite TV company behind the new Web video service Sling TV, and Netflix opposed the deal. “It goes to show you how important broadband is,” said Amy Yong, a Macquarie analyst. Regulators have taken other steps that signal how important they consider Internet access. The Federal Communications Commission in February released new “Net Neutrality” rules meant to keep broadband providers from charging Internet companies for “fast lane” access or favoring some content. The broadband industry has sued to stop the rules. “We have to live with it, and respect that, and move on,” Comcast Chairman and CEO Brian Roberts said in an interview on CNBC, referring to the government’s opposition to the deal. “We always structured this deal in a way that would enable us to walk away.” Comcast doesn’t owe Time Warner Cable a breakup fee because the deal didn’t work out. With the deal between Comcast Corp. and Time Warner Cable Inc. called off, a transaction with Charter Communications Inc. aimed at smoothing the way for regulatory approval also falls apart. Even with the Comcast and Time Warner Cable deal being nixed, cable companies are likely to keep combining as costs rise for the shows, sports and movies they pipe to subscribers while video customers decrease. Many analysts expect that Charter Communications could resurrect its own effort to acquire Time Warner Cable. A combined Charter and Time Warner Cable would have 15 million video customers and 16.5 million Internet customers. That’s still smaller than Comcast alone, which has 22.4 million video subscribers and 22 million Internet customers. And the $48.5 billion combination of DirecTV and AT&T is still expected to go through. Shares of Time Warner Cable Inc. rose $2.74 to $151.50 in morning trading while Comcast shares slipped 8 cents to $59.18. Republished with permission of The Associated Press.
