Debate heats up over Net neutrality

By Marguerite Reardon
News.com

http://news.com.com/Debate+heats+up+over+Net+neutrality/2100-1037_3-6049863.html

Story last modified Wed Mar 15 06:36:24 PST 2006



SAN JOSE, Calif.--Speculation that the two biggest phone companies in the 
country, AT&T and Verizon Communications, are planning to create a tiered 
Internet system that would require big bandwidth hogs like Google or Yahoo 
to pay more for their access has become a hot-button issue in the tech 
industry.

Increasingly, it's also an issue on Capitol Hill, where some lawmakers are 
developing rules to maintain so-called Net neutrality--also called network 
neutrality--and prevent the emergence of a tiered system.

At the Voice over the Net (VON) conference at the San Jose Convention 
Center on Tuesday, companies on both sides of the bandwidth isle debated 
how much Net regulation is needed. But the broader discussion was what 
exactly Net neutrality means and whether legislators are discussing a 
solution to a problem that doesn't yet exist.

"I am hopelessly confused about Net neutrality," said Blair Levin, a 
managing director and regulatory analyst for Stifel, Nicolaus and Co., a 
financial research company. "I know what the Bells are saying, but it's 
unclear what they mean."

CEOs from network owners AT&T and Verizon Communications have made comments 
suggesting they plan to create a system where some companies would have to 
pay more for their data-intensive use of the Net, which, they argue, slows 
access for regular customers. But for the most part, details of those plans 
are still unclear.

On the other side of the debate are companies such as Google, eBay and 
Yahoo, which are against any companies taking on the role of "IP traffic 
gatekeeper." They support the idea of federal rules that would further 
restrict network owners from blocking or restricting traffic.

That idea doesn't sit well with cable companies and phone companies-—namely 
AT&T and Verizon Communications—-which argue that new regulations could 
have unintended consequences that would stifle innovation and hurt 
consumers in the long run. And while they do not support new legislation 
that has been introduced to protect Net neutrality, they have filed 
petitions with the Federal Communications Commission to loosen existing 
regulations to give them more flexibility in what they do with their own 
network infrastructure.

Cisco Systems, which supplies the phone companies with networking 
equipment, has joined its telecommunications customers in cautioning 
Congress about introducing new laws. Last week, Cisco CEO John Chambers 
wrote a letter to Rep. Joe Barton, a Texas Republican and the chairman of 
the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. In short, Cisco's position is 
that no legislation is needed at this time and that phone companies should 
be allowed to experiment with different technologies within their networks 
to form new business models and alleviate network congestion.

Robert Pepper, senior managing director of technology policy for Cisco, 
attended VON and echoed Chambers' thoughts.

"We don't think that new regulation is needed on (Net) neutrality," Pepper 
said in an interview. "The FCC needs to use the existing policies to punish 
bad actors and bad actions. Additional regulation could end up hurting 
innovation rather than helping it."


Bandwidth hogs

The debate is heating up as new applications such as voice and video make 
their way onto the Internet. These features require a certain quality of 
service for them to work properly. Network owners argue that these 
services, which are often offered by other companies, eat up bandwidth.

Cisco believes the phone companies could use their technology to manage 
their network resources more efficiently and prioritize services for 
consumers. Today consumers who want access to high-bandwidth applications 
like video must subscribe to expensive broadband packages. These consumers 
may not need all this bandwidth all the time, but today they're forced to 
pay a flat fee for a set slice of Net access.

If network operators were able to provide priority to this video traffic 
through their network and charge the content providers for this priority, 
their customers could access their content over lower-speed broadband 
connections. In this scenario, a tiered service could actually benefit 
consumers, they argue.

But Google, PacWest Telecom and others, which have written a letter to Rep. 
Barton urging him to preserve Net neutrality, fear that network operators 
will abuse their market power and give their own services priority over 
their competitors. They also fear that the fees they charge competitors 
will keep some small companies from being able to deliver new services.

"They shouldn't be able to give preference to their own content over 
someone else's content," said John Sumpter, vice president of regulatory 
affairs for PacWest. "The solution is a form of Net neutrality that would 
not allow them to discriminate against other companies' applications."

Representatives from the phone companies say these fears are unfounded 
because customers would not allow this to happen.

"We have no intention of blocking or degrading other services on our 
network," said David Young, vice president of federal regulatory issues for 
Verizon. "We are giving customers what they want, which is fast pipes at a 
low cost. Anyone who tries to take that away from consumers will be 
punished by the market."

How Congress will handle Net neutrality is still up in the air. Barton has 
introduced a draft bill to the House Commerce Committee that would prohibit 
network operators from blocking or interfering with access of applications 
on the Internet. And Sen. Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, is working on a 
measure that will foster "equal treatment" for all Internet content and 
dispel worries that telecommunications providers will play favorites in the 
future.

But on Tuesday, Sen. Ted Stevens, the Alaska Republican who chairs the 
Senate Commerce Committee, said that a proposal to overhaul U.S. 
telecommunications laws may not require network providers to follow Net 
neutrality principles.


================================
George Antunes, Political Science Dept
University of Houston; Houston, TX 77204
Voice: 713-743-3923  Fax: 713-743-3927
antunes at uh dot edu



Reply with a "Thank you" if you liked this post.
_____________________________

MEDIANEWS mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to