The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Divided FCC ends rules on net neutrality
Industry promises internet experience for public won’t change.
The Federal Communications Commission repealed the Obamaera “net neutrality” rules Thursday, giving internet service providers like Verizon, Comcast and AT&T a free hand to slow or block websites and apps as they see fit or charge more for faster speeds.
In a straight party-line vote of 3-2, the Republican-controlled FCC junked the long-time principle that said all web traffic must be treated equally. The move represents a radical departure from a decade of federal oversight.
The broadband industry has promised that the internet experience for the public isn’t going to change.
But the move toward eliminating the rules has touched off protests in recent months, with ordinary Americans worried that cable and phone companies would now be able to control what people see and do online. On Thursday, about 60 protesters gathered in the bitter chill in Washington to protest the FCC’s expected
decision.
The telecommunications companies lobbied hard to overturn the rules, contending they are heavy-handed and are discouraging investment in broadband networks.
“What is the FCC doing today?” asked FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, a Republican. “Quite simply, we are restoring the light-touch framework that has governed the internet for most of its existence.”
The FCC vote is unlikely to be the last word. Opponents of the move plan legal challenges, and some hope to make it an issue in the 2018 midterm elections. There is also some hope that Congress might overturn the FCC decision.
Peter Swire, a law and ethics professor at the Georgia Tech Scheller College of Business, said major internet service providers “got the result they wanted” in today’s vote.
“The internet providers want to provide more than just a connection to the internet,” said Swire, who specializes in privacy, cybersecurity and internet law. “They may want to make business deals with content providers like Netflix, for instance, and those business deals might give faster service to Netflix and discounts on Netflix for the customer.”
But other companies fear they’re be squeezed by the big ISPs to pay up to keep their website and content on the internet fast-lane.
One thing is for certain: today’s vote settles nothing. The whole issue will end up in court, Swire predicted, and will likely wind its way through the federal appeals process and potentially to the U.S. Supreme Court.
That legal uncertainty means that the internet providers aren’t likely to trot out too many changes lest they be on the wrong side of a high court decision.
“My best guess is consumers won’t see much change right away,” Swire said.
Under the new rules, the Comcasts and AT&Ts of the world will be free to block rival apps, slow down competing services or offer faster speeds to companies that pay up. They just have to post their policies online or tell the FCC.
The change also eliminates certain federal consumer protections, bars state laws that contradict the FCC’s approach, and largely transfers oversight of internet service to another agency altogether,
the Federal Trade Commission.
Tim Cailloux said he fundamentally agrees with the spirit of net neutrality. But he chafed at the mechanism the FCC used to enforce net neutrality — by designating ISPs like his small company, Southern Internet Inc., under what’s known as Title II. That title of the Communications Act of 1934 meant internet providers were now regulated as public utilities.
Southern Internet provides wireless internet service in the rural part of south Fulton County and the city of Chattahoochee Hills. Cailloux said his firm has about 100 customers.
“Where our customers go and how they use information is up to them,” he said. “Free and open access to information is absolutely critical. There’s no interest for me to restrict where you can go on internet and what you can use it for as long as it is legal.”
Under Title II, Cailloux said his business was burdened with compliance costs that he now plans to spend on upgrading his network. And he said he won’t throttle his customers’ access as a result of the regulatory change.
Congress could reverse decision
A spokesman for Cox Communications praised the new policy direction of the FCC, but said the company is still committed to “net neutrality rules.”
The new FCC chairman’s preference for “light-touch” regulation is preferable to the previous view, which relied on oversight rules crafted in the 1930s for emerging phone companies, said Todd Smith in a statement to the AJC.
“We do not block, throttle or otherwise interfere with consumers’ desire to go where they want on the Internet,” he said. “Cox has always been committed to providing an open internet
experience for our customers, and reversing the classification of internet services does not change our commitment.”
Atlanta-based Cox Com- munications is one of three business units owned by Cox Enterprises. One of the other units owns The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
The current management of Atlanta-based EarthLink, which was long a premier internet service provider, also asserted Thursday that the change in policy will not mean modification of its practices.
“Our position remains unchanged,” said Scott Morris, spokesman for Arkansas-based Windstream. “We support an open internet and do not block or slow down any internet traffic such as streaming or browsing.”
Windstream bought EarthLink in late 2016.
Mark Stanley, a spokesman for the civil liberties organization Demand Progress, said there is a “good chance” Congress could reverse it.
“The fact that Chairman Pai went through with this, a policy that is so unpopular, is somewhat shocking,” he said. “Unfortunately, not surprising.”
With their vote, he added, the FCC’s Republican commissioners are abandoning the pledge they took to make a rapid, efficient communications service available to all people in the U.S., without discrimination.
But Michael O’Rielly, a Republican commissioner appointed by Obama, called the FCC’s approach a “well-reasoned and soundly justified order.”
The internet, he said, “has functioned without net neutrality rules for far longer than it has without them.” The decision “will not break the internet.”