The FCC has proposed a Third Way for net neutrality that shields broadband companies from full telecommunications regulation but prevents them from charging customers the way cell phone companies do. Flickr photo.

Net neutrality, in a nutshell is fast, open, equal and affordable Internet access to all Americans. Some broadband providers have proposed to start charging more to their customers for higher levels of service, much like cell phone companies. The Federal Communications Commission started an uproar in the net neutrality debate on Thursday when it announced that it will seek public comment on imposing new regulations on Internet service providers to keep them from offering tiered service. Meanwhile, there’s an effort on Capitol Hill to define more clearly the FCC’s authority. But the FCC doesn’t want to wait for Congress to get around to it before it regains control of the net neutrality issue

FCC net neutrality

Consumer groups and free speech advocate groups such as savetheinternet.com are in favor of net neutrality. Internet service providers and free market advocates are against it. Until last week the two proposed versions of net neutrality legislation would prohibit: (1) the “tiering” of broadband through sale of voice- or video-oriented Quality of Service packages; and (2) content- or service-sensitive blocking or censorship on the part of broadband carriers. Last week, the FCC released what is called the “Third Way” plan.

Net neutrality: The Third Way

Net neutrality under the third way, according to the Washington Post, is this: Currently, broadband is defined as an information service, which means it doesn’t face much FCC oversight. The new plan is to shift broadband into the same classification as telephone service, which would trigger more oversight by the agency. The FCC says it would not subject Internet service providers to the full brunt of regulation that would come with the new classification.

Comcast net neutrality case

The FCC’s Third Way is an effort to regain control of the net neutrality issue in response to a Federal Court decision in April that overturned a 2008 FCC ruling in the Comcast net neutrality case. In 2007, Comcast was found to be blocking or severely delaying BitTorrent uploads on their network, claiming that downloading huge amounts of data was clogging the network. In August 2008, the FCC ruled that Comcast broke the law when it throttled the bandwidth available to certain customers for video files in order to make sure that other customers had adequate bandwidth.

Time Warner net neutrality challenge

In a 2009 test of the net neutrality issue,Time Warner Cable announced its intention offer broadband packages in 10GB, 20GB, 40GB and 60GB increments. The plans included overage charges of $1 per GB, capped at $75. Time Warner launched the pricing system in several markets to much public outcry. Later the company announced that it would offer larger packages but public discontent remained. They were eventually forced to abandon the Time Warner net neutrality challenge altogether.

Net neutrality supporters

The FCC voted Thursday to start the controversial process of reclassifying high-speed Internet access to give the agency authority over service providers that would prevent disparate treatment of customers. The Channel Web reports that last week, a group of 13 companies including Amazon, Google  and Sony sent the FCC a letter in support of the Third Way saying that it will ensure that consumers have access to an open Internet, one that would preserve a level playing field for all participants. The net neutrality supporters said the Third Way does so without regulating the Internet but by applying basic rules of the road to the transmission services that provide access to the Internet.

Against net neutrality

Republicans in Congress are adamantly against net neutrality any which way. The Los Angeles Times reports that Republicans offer the familiar argument that the Third Way is more government meddling in a free market that will stunt innovation and investment, echoing their Internet-service provider patrons. Texas Republican senator Kay Bailey Hutchison speaking out against net neutrality said the agency has created “new burdensome regulations that threaten to stifle the growth of America’s broadband services.”

Google net neutrality letter

But Google cheered the FCC’s decision. “As we have said before, broadband infrastructure is too important to be left outside of any oversight,” the company said on The Official Google Blog. Massachusetts Democratic senator Edward J. Markey applauded the FCC’s move, calling it a “light-touch regulatory proposal” that would ensure “continued innovation, consumer protection and certainty in the broadband marketplace.”

Net Neutrality is the idea that all legal internet traffic should be treated equally. Image from Flickr.

Net Neutrality is the idea that all legal internet traffic should be treated equally. The concept of net neutrality seems simple enough, but a recent ruling by a Federal appeals court puts the FCC’s ability to protect net neutrality in question: Can the Federal government  protect net neutrality, or will internet service providers be able to determine which payday loans online web sites users can visit?

Net neutrality ruling strikes down FCC action

The net neutrality case that the Federal appeals court just ruled on is Comcast Corp. v. FCC, 08-1291. In 2008, the Federal Communications Commission sanctioned Comcast Corporation for deliberately slowing internet traffic. Many users, some trying to apply for payday loans no fax, complained to the FCC about the slowdown. The FCC claimed that by slowing internet speeds for high-volume users, Comcast was preventing access. Comcast sued the FCC with the argument that the FCC was stepping over the legal authority given it by congress. The Federal appeals court ruled in Comcast’s favor on April 6.

The legal framework of net neutrality

Currently, net neutrality does not have an enforcement framework in the United States. The Federal Communications Commission does have the legal authority to regulate telecommunications services, which the commission refers to as “Title II” services. However, broadband internet service is currently classified as a “Title I” information service. While President Obama and Congress have discussed creating a new legal framework to protect net neutrality, no specific legislation is currently under consideration.

Arguments against net neutrality

Currently, most large providers are warning the FCC that reclassifying broadband service as Title II would be a “very bad idea.” Threatening years of legal challenges, providers such as Verizon, Comcast and AT&T are speaking out very loudly against net neutrality protections. The basic argument of these service providers is that the government has no business regulating their network management. Each internet service provider is saying that net neutrality actions would illegally violate their right to manage their businesses as they see fit.

How can the FCC protect net neutrality?

The FCC, as well as the Federal government, puts quite a bit of stock in the concept of net neutrality. The National Broadband plan rests heavily on a neutral internet. At this point, the FCC has three options. First, it can classify broadband service as a Title II service. Second, it can ask Congress to present a legal framework for net neutrality. Finally, the FCC can appeal the net neutrality decision handed down today to the Supreme Court.

Sources:

Computer World
Wall Street Journal

Internet cafes provide the majority of internet access on Mainland China. Image from Flickr.

As of 3:03 p.m. Eastern time today, Google has officially shut down Google.cn search operations, ending the online loans of information that Google and China had worked out. Google and China have been in a long-standing debate over the censoring of search results — a debate that has gotten especially heated since Jan. 12. Today, on its official blog, Google announced that had cut the cord to Google.cn and would be redirecting all searches in China to Google.com.hk, the Hong Kong portal for the search engine.

Availability of Google in China

Along with redirecting the Google.cn portal to Google.com.hk, Google also launched an “Apps Status Dashboard” report on China. According to that dashboard, as of 2:15 p.m. Pacific time today, Google users in China are able to access the web and image search functions freely, without censorship. News, advertisements, and Gmail also appear to be freely accessible. However, YouTube, Google Sites, and Blogger are completely blocked, while Google Groups, Picasa, and Google Docs have a small loan from the government – they are only partially blocked.

China’s unique relationship with Hong Kong

Google’s decision to redirect Google.cn to Google.com.hk is a decision made partially possible by the unique relationship of mainland China with Hong Kong. Google has long had a non-censored presence in Hong Kong, even though it is a “special administrative region” of the Republic of China. Hong Kong is technically Chinese, though it is operated as a multi-party democratic republic, rather than under the single-party system of China. Because Hong Kong is financially and politically separate from China, Google has been able to offer a full suite of web services there for many years.

How China’s government will react to Google

Senior Vice President David Drummond, Google’s chief legal officer, stated today that “We very much hope that the Chinese government respects our decision, though we are well aware that it could at any time block access to our services.” Most industry and political watchers do expect China to begin censoring search results from Google.com.hk any day. The Chinese government has a long history of censorship, and China’s “Great Firewall” is surprisingly effective at censoring sections of the internet that the Chinese government determines should not be allowed.