A screenshot of the OpenInternet.gov website.
The Story
In a speech to the Brooking’s Institute, FCC chairman Julius Genachowski gave a very rough overview of the FCC’s upcoming efforts to reach a legal definition of what net neutrality in the United States will be. As part of this, the FCC launched a new website called OpenInternet.gov, which it is planning to use as a vector for “discussion about the free and open Internet” as part of the FCC’s initiatives to define net neutrality. The site will allow for users to discuss current FCC happenings. And while comments left on OpenInternet.gov won’t be a matter of the official record, the FCC will consider user input in its crafting of new policies.
On Content and Protocols
From the speech, we’ve been able to piece together what the FCC is currently considering. Mr. Genachowski wants internet service providers to abide by principles of “non-discrimination” and transparency. Selectively throttling a protocol, even peer-to peer (which was specifically mentioned in the speech) will be illegal. However, Mr. Genachowski did say that sometimes network providers might have to slow down their networks if traffic becomes too much to handle.
But this is where transparency might serve to keep the internet neutral: everything a provider does that isn’t neutral, such as throttling or filtering, may be required to be made public. This will “give consumers the confidence of knowing that they’re getting the service they’ve paid for,” and that’s exactly right. Not only that, but providers will not be able to mess with the internet connections of customers and keep it secret.
And He’s Tough On Wireless
What the transparency clause does to wireless providers is very interesting. In the speech, Mr. Genachowski stated that principles outlined in the speech “apply to the Internet however accessed,” meaning that the wireless industry does not get breaks. That said, it seems that they will be allowed to engage in minoring throttling if need be. Because they have to be open about it, the wireless companies cannot continue acting as a secretive cabal which moderates the content consumers can and can’t access. If wireless providers are prevented access to streaming services like Hulu, they’ll have to both be public about it and make a case for their actions that the FCC believes is sensible.
Shapeless, Formless
Everything mentioned in today’s speech is really just an outline, but it all seems rather confusing. For example, how will the FCC determine what sort of throttling is illegal and what isn’t? Presumably the definition will be made clear by the time that any net neutrality law is passed, but right now everything seems rather murky.
