Big Government Threatens Internet Independence
Americans will celebrate their freedom from tyranny on July 4. Unfortunately, these freedoms are rapidly eroding due to an increasing amount of government regulation and intervention into everyone’s daily lives.
The most recent example of onerous and oppressive overreach occurred when the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) decided to impose antiquated rules over the Internet, which took effect on June 12, 2015. While consumers may not have noticed any immediate change in how the Internet operates, future technological advances will begin to suffer as Broadband Internet Access Services (BIAS) providers, the FCC’s new term for an Internet Service Provider (ISP) (yes, the FCC really did feel the need to create a new title for an ISP), struggle to meet complex reporting and other legal requirements.
The new rules subject providers to mandates written in Title II of the 1934 Communications Act, a law that was intended to cover old-fashion telephone services. Many proponents of a government-run Internet made “Title II” their rallying cry, misleading thousands into believing that this would create a freer Internet. But this section of law enables the FCC to impose the heavy hand of government on a previously innovative and energetic market that includes both connected and wireless Internet services. For example, BIAS providers will need to obtain (although the new rules indicate this is supposed to be voluntary) an advisory opinion on new technological advances prior to deploying services to consumers, or face the potential of fines from the FCC.
On June 22, 2015, Commercial Network Services (CNS), an edge provider, filed what may be the first test of the FCC’s reclassification of the Internet under Title II. In an informal complaint, CNS alleged that Time Warner Cable (TWC) violated Title II interconnection rules and the net neutrality rules against paid prioritization by charging CNS to deliver its streaming video service to TWC customers. TWC contends that the FCC rules only cover the “last-mile” connection between the end customer and the Internet provider, and CNS’ complaint does not meet that criteria. With the additional litigation requirements complaints such as this one will place on the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau, the wait for advisory opinions will lead to a slowdown in innovation.
Congress has been working on a legislative solution to counter the FCC’s decision and keep the Internet independent. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) and Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.) are collaborating on legislation that would codify the basic principles of an open Internet that nearly everyone agrees upon: No blocking lawful traffic; no prohibitions of non-harmful devices; no throttling; no paid prioritization; and public disclosure of network management practices, performance, and commercial terms of broadband Internet services.
Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.) has introduced a resolution to rescind the Title II order under Congressional Review Act. The House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications and Technology recently passed several bills to reform and improve the FCC. In addition, language has been included in the House version of the Financial Services and Government Affairs Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2016 that would restrict the use of FCC appropriations for implementation of net neutrality rules until a final court decision has been made.
On the judicial front, nine petitions have been filed against the FCC over the new rules. The filers include Daniel Berninger, founder of Voice Communications Exchange (VCXC); the American Cable Association; Alamo Broadband; AT&T; the Cellular Telephone Industries Association (CTIA); Century Link; the National Telecommunications and Cable Association; the United States Telecom Association (USTelecom); and, the Wireless Internet Service Providers Association (WISPA). A requested stay of the new rules was denied by the U.S. District Court of Appeals on June 11, 2015. It is expected that the court, which has indicated that it will act on the suits in an expedited manner, will begin reviewing the case in the fall.
If Congress fails to act to mitigate the rules, or the court decides to allow them to stand, people who used the Internet prior to June 12 will one day be sitting in rocking chairs, reminiscing with their children and grandchildren about the good old days when communications technology and the Internet grew by leaps and bounds; the Internet of Things was on the rise; the cost for Internet access was decreasing; and an amazing amount of information was available with the touch of one hand. Sadly, under the new regime of the FCC playing “Mother-May-I?” these innovations will probably come to a standstill just like plain old copper-wire landline telephone service.
