Light Reading

Net Neutrality Fight Not Over

Carol Wilson
1/14/2014
50%
50%

The federal appeals court ruling today that struck down the FCC's Net Neutrality rules is the latest chapter in a long saga, and it leaves the next move uncertain as new FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler and crew decide whether to file an appeal.

What's interesting about the ruling is that it actually upheld the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) 's right to impose such rules. The court effectively said the agency can regulate the Internet, but it said the rules as they currently exist in the FCC's Open Internet Order couldn't be applied to broadband Internet service providers. The FCC had already indicated that these companies are not common carriers and thus not subject to regulation. (See Bye Bye Net Neutrality?)

That sets up the possibility of the FCC reclassifying the broadband ISPs as common carriers -- a process that would be lengthy and hard-fought on all sides -- or appealing the ruling and arguing that Net Neutrality regulations aren't common carrier rules.

The Washington Post reported that Judge David Tatel of the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, who wrote the opinion, noted that the Communications Act prohibits the FCC from regulating companies that it says are not common carriers.

Wheeler responded to the ruling almost immediately by saying the FCC is keeping its options open and could appeal. "I am committed to maintaining our networks as engines for economic growth, test beds for innovative services and products, and channels for all forms of speech protected by the First Amendment." (See Wheeler Walks Line on Net Neutrality.)

The reactions of the two Republican commissioners seemed to indicate little interest in more court action. Commissioner Ajit Pai said the latest ruling was a sign that the agency should "take no for an answer." Commissioner Mike O'Reilly said the FCC should stop looking to impose "prophylactic regulations" and focus on removing obstacles to broadband investment and innovation.

Other reactions went along the expected lines. Verizon Communications Inc. (NYSE: VZ), which brought the court challenge, applauded the decision but said it will not impact consumers' ability to access content via the Internet. In its reaction, the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA) also pledged its commitment to an open Internet.

Consumer groups such as Public Knowledge expressed alarm at the ruling and its potential for allowing large ISPs to control access to the Internet and harm innovation. Harold Feld, senior vice president for Public Knowledge, said in a press release that the ruling could impair the FCC's ability to manage regulations in the transition to an all-IP network. However, he also said the court left the door open for the FCC to "craft open Internet protection [regulations] that are not full fledged common carrier rules. Alternatively, if the FCC needs broader authority it can classify broadband as a title 2 common carrier service."

— Carol Wilson, Editor-at-Large, Light Reading

(23)  | 
Comment  | 
Print  | 
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View        ADD A COMMENT
Page 1 / 3   >   >>
geekhole
50%
50%
geekhole,
User Rank: Light Beer
1/15/2014 | 1:52:32 PM
Best Effort vs. Differentiated Services...
To build wider highways where all drivers share the same experience or to add toll roads next to the highways for the tractor trailers who don't want to wait in traffic, that is the question. 
brookseven
50%
50%
brookseven,
User Rank: Light Sabre
1/15/2014 | 10:54:47 AM
Re: Might be Over
Carol,

I am a dreamer....don't harsh my buzz! :)

seven

PS - I have lobbied and testified at the FCC so I know better.
Carol Wilson
50%
50%
Carol Wilson,
User Rank: Blogger
1/15/2014 | 10:53:36 AM
Re: Might be Over
Very well said, Seven. 

I agree with what you are saying about structural separation - and the Pronto reference made me nostalgic. 

But can you see today's FCC creating this regime, because I can't. The lobbying power of the big carriers is too strong and they would never let this happen. 
brookseven
50%
50%
brookseven,
User Rank: Light Sabre
1/15/2014 | 10:50:36 AM
Re: Might be Over
Carol,

Yes, I believe SS is impossible.  That is why I advocate for making Broadband Access a Universal Service.  I would not change the rules around IP transit but make sure that people understood that if things get unfair I am going common carrier on them.

So once I got folks Universal Broadband Service,  I would do it with escalating minimum data rate capability.  Essentially I would force people to deploy fiber.

It is one reason I think language is important.  ISP service is NOT Access Service.  Even today you can get (for regular DSL) UNE-L.  I would make the ongoing waiver of UNE-L supported by this Universal Service investment.

The one thing that I would go for if I was the FCC is that the Access Network is a MOST a Layer 2 network.  The reason for this is that you could then do Pronto style unbundling to replace UNE-L as we get there.

So, what do I get as carrier?  You get to own your pipe...you get to deliver service.  If you invest in your network, you will get more business.  I think this notion that OTT players are taking money out of the carrier hands is a nice lobbying position.  So let's go back to static web pages and email.  People drop the size of their BB Access pipes and the carriers/MSOs lose a huge chunk of revenue.  Essentially, all the Access Providers should bend at the knee of Netflix and Youtube and thank them for all the revenue they bring.

seven

 
KBode
50%
50%
KBode,
User Rank: Light Sabre
1/15/2014 | 10:16:22 AM
Re: Might be Over
Yes, I think the discussion has gotten so incredibly convoluted over the last few years that perhaps what is needed most is a pure example of just what happens if these rules don't exist or there's no regulators with the authority to police anti-competitive behavior against content and services.

Though I worry that you could elininate ALL regulators and regulations from the market, see prices skyrocket 300%, see non-ISP services blocked and hindered, and you'd still see rhetoric claiming that we were living in a telecom Utopia from many corners.
Carol Wilson
50%
50%
Carol Wilson,
User Rank: Blogger
1/15/2014 | 10:13:20 AM
Re: Might be Over
Two responses:

Seven, structural separation has been the most intruiguing option for some time now. Real implementations have been rare and not successful and I doubt it will ever happen on a large scale, as do you, I suspect. 

KBode, it will be interesting to see how long the companies who battled NN for so long can go without confirming the worst fears of those who sought NN. I share your honest curiousity for how this plays out. 
KBode
50%
50%
KBode,
User Rank: Light Sabre
1/15/2014 | 10:02:18 AM
Might be Over
Lost is the fact that these rules never really did all that much to begin with. They were based largely on proposed rules created by Verizon and Google, didn't really cover the anti-competitive implementation of usage caps, and certainly didn't protect consumers from abuses on wireless networks.

As I see it Wheeler can either buck his lobbyist history and reclassify carriers under Title II, or we can look forward to seeing ISPs unleash their version of "innovation" on the market under layers of new concepts solely focused on jacking up quarterly revenues with new and expensive pricing layers.

Neutrality opponents have long argued nothing would go wrong with no rules or a strong regulatory presence in place, and I'm honestly now quite curious to see them get to test their theory.
spc_isdnip
50%
50%
spc_isdnip,
User Rank: Lightning
1/15/2014 | 7:32:01 AM
Re: Impact on IP network rules and regs
Well, Seven, I certainly think structural separation would be a good idea, and have advocated for it consistently.  But I do think that ISPs generally still ban spamming, even if it technically complies.  Remember Spamford Wallace?  He never got to set up his spam-friendly ISP because it would have been denied transit.  There are acceptable bulk emails, the type sent to existin cusotmer relationships by companies like Constant Contact.  But then there is pure spam, which is legal if it has a PO Box footer which techically removes the recipient from *that* specific mailing six weeks after the fact (making it useless) if the recipient sends postal mail to that box.  Its a joke.

But more importantly, bulk video uploading can cause real harm too, since there is highly constrained upsteram capacity on cable networks, and that's what Comcast was trying to solve in 2005 (a bit ham-handedly, perhaps) when Vuze, a pR0n distributor building a rogue CDN out of its clients running on home PCs, got Kevin Martin on their side to attack Comcast and start the NN fight at the FCC.
brookseven
50%
50%
brookseven,
User Rank: Light Sabre
1/15/2014 | 12:04:41 AM
Re: Impact on IP network rules and regs
I ran the Message Security (read Spam Filtering) service for Edgewave.  We had about 200 Internet Service Providers as customers.  So, I think you are all using words so loosely we are bound to argue.

If you are on an running Gmail over an Sonic.net service you actually have 3 service providers:

1 - AT&T (via UNE-L) is you local access line owner

2 - Sonic is both your Broadband Access Provider (or Access Service Provider) as well as your Internet Service Provider.

3 - Google is your Mail Service Provider.

In this case, Google will do Spam filtering via its former Postini Mail filter.  By the way, they do inbound mail filtering only and do NOT filter outbound mail.  Neither Sonic in either of its roles nor AT&T is doing any filtering.

On top of that, we are always talking past each other about the word SPAM.  I do not know of any ISPs that block the transmission of CAN-SPAM compliant emails that do not have any malicious components.  I will add that we allowed users (if the ISP wanted to allow them to do this) to block what we classified as "BULK" emails. We did block emails that had malicious components within them either by putting them in the Spam Folder or by actually blocking them

Let me also say that Outbound Filtering is not the norm for SPAM filters.  Only some filters actually work on the Outbound Stream.  ISPs do need to monitor their reputation and deploy Outbound filters (and Edgewave had them).

I agree with some few exceptions that pure blacklisting is a poor way to block SPAM and will become OBE with IPv6.

To recap - Mail Service Providers (MSP) provide Spam Filtering.  It is essentially a feature that is expected by users.  Some MSPs allow end users to configure their Spam Filtering actions based on mail classification.  The Internet Part of this does no filtering.  

I also think this language confusion exists in the lower conversation about network investment.  Nobody cares about ISP investment.  Everybody cares about ASP investment.  Maybe we should talk about structural separation again.

seven

 
spc_isdnip
50%
50%
spc_isdnip,
User Rank: Lightning
1/14/2014 | 10:24:10 PM
Re: Impact on IP network rules and regs
I'm talking about blacklisting and "mutually assured destrution", not mail-conntet filtering, which should generally be an end user task.  An ISP will block another one that permits spam or sells "pink contracts" to spammers, and an ISP will block an ISP who provides transit to such an ISP.  They don't just block the spam but the whole ISP, which is why spammers rely on pwned machines and don't just put servers in carrier hotels.  Since this policy has been around for a long time, people don't even know it exists, since no ISP wants the equivalent of capital punishment for permiting spam.  But strict neutrality rules would overturn that, since the yes-you-CAN SPAM act makes spam legal.
Page 1 / 3   >   >>
Flash Poll
From The Founder
Anshul Sadana answers questions from Steve Saunders, Light Reading's founder and CEO, about Arista's CloudVision, a global cloud network controller for workload orchestration and workflow automation delivering a turnkey solution for cloud networking.
Live Streaming Video
CLOUD / MANAGED SERVICES: Prepping Ethernet for the Cloud
Moderator: Ray LeMaistre Panelists: Jeremy Bye, Leonard Sheahan
LRTV Custom TV
End-User or Enterprise Benefits to the New IP

7|30|15   |   04:27   |   (1) comment


Andrew Coward discusses what the New IP means to end users or enterprise customers. He explains compelling reasons, including how every customer can get their own network, from the transformation to the New IP.
LRTV Custom TV
Network Visibility & the New IP

7|30|15   |   02:23   |   (0) comments


Mukund Srigopal provides an explanation of what network visibility is and how it is essential as service providers transition to the New IP. In addition, the importance of the network packet broker is discussed.
Between the CEOs
Video Exclusive With Basil Alwan, Alcatel-Lucent

7|24|15   |   26:44   |   (5) comments


Basil Alwan, President of IP Routing & Transport at Alcatel-Lucent, discusses virtualization, cultural challenges, the capex crunch and more with Light Reading founder and CEO Steve Saunders.
LRTV Custom TV
VDF: Enable the Financial With Mobile Money

7|20|15   |   06:53   |   (0) comments


Ian Ravenscroft discusses how operators can expand to occupy the entire digital services value chain through service innovation.
LRTV Custom TV
Telefónica on OSS Transformation

7|20|15   |   06:01   |   (0) comments


Jose Gonzales discusses the details of Telefónica's operation transformation program.
LRTV Custom TV
Judi Achmadi on Huawei's Cloud Storage Solution

7|20|15   |   03:33   |   (0) comments


Judi discusses the key business goals of TelekomSigma's public cloud service and how Huawei's solution helps them address challenges.
LRTV Custom TV
KPN Enlightening Digital Business & IT Transformation

7|20|15   |   06:19   |   (0) comments


Rob de Beer discusses the changes that operators need to make with service innovation now coming from the Internet world.
LRTV Custom TV
Stratus Telco-Grade Cloud Solutions & NFV

7|20|15   |   07:34   |   (0) comments


Ali Kafel from Stratus Technologies addresses high-availability concerns within the telco industry with a solution that enables telcos to provide high-availability and stateful fault-tolerance using a software-based approach.
LRTV Documentaries
The Six Million Dollar Business Man

7|20|15   |   01:52   |   (0) comments


Steve Saunders, publisher. A man barely alive after an acquisition malfunction imploded the company he founded. Gentlemen, we can rebuild Light Reading. Better, faster, stronger.
Between the CEOs
CEO Chat With Anukool Lakhina, Guavus

7|20|15   |   38:51   |   (1) comment


Guavus CEO Anukool Lakhina talks to Light Reading founder and CEO Steve Saunders about the role of operational analytics in the communications services and networking sectors, particularly in relation to IoT.
LRTV Custom TV
IBM's Flash Storage With Intel QuickAssist

7|20|15   |   03:18   |   (0) comments


Intel's Bev Crair and IBM's Eric Herzog discuss how IBM's V9000 Flash Storage System has helped customers around the world. Featuring real-time compression powered by Intel QuickAssist Technology, the V9000 is a next-gen flash storage solution.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
Thailand's AIS: Transforming to an FMC Operator

7|17|15   |   4:53   |   (0) comments


Saran Phaloprakarn, Senior VP of Fixed Broadband Business Management of Thailand's AIS, was a keynote speaker at the first Asia-Pacific Ultra Broadband Summit in Bangkok. In this video, he talks to Heavy Reading about transforming into an FMC (FBB+MBB+Content) operator.
Upcoming Live Events
September 16-17, 2015, The Westin Galleria Dallas, Dallas, TX
September 16, 2015, The Westin Galleria Dallas, Dallas, TX
September 16, 2015, The Westin Galleria Dallas, Dallas, TX
September 29-30, 2015, The Westin Grand Müchen, Munich, Germany
October 14-15, 2015, New Orleans Ernest N. Morial Convention Center, New Orleans, LA
November 5, 2015, Hilton Santa Clara, Santa Clara, CA
November 17, 2015, Santa Clara, California
December 1, 2015, The Westin Times Square, New York City
All Upcoming Live Events
Infographics
Network operators start seeing savings from NFV in the first year, according to a study by Affirmed Networks and ACG.
Hot Topics
Cable Feuds With Senate Dems Over STBs
Alan Breznick, Cable/Video Practice Leader, 7/31/2015
RJio to Launch Its Own 4G Devices Brand
Gagandeep Kaur, Contributing Editor, 7/27/2015
Qualcomm Wants FCC to Stay Out of LTE-U Fray
Sarah Thomas, Editorial Operations Director, 7/27/2015
Silence Like Diamonds – Episode 2: Warning Shot
John Barnes, Author, 7/28/2015
Like Us on Facebook
Twitter Feed
September 22, 2015
Media Begins With “Me”
Webinar Archive
BETWEEN THE CEOs - Executive Interviews
Basil Alwan, President of IP Routing & Transport at Alcatel-Lucent, discusses virtualization, cultural challenges, the capex crunch and more with Light Reading founder and CEO Steve Saunders.
Guavus CEO Anukool Lakhina talks to Light Reading founder and CEO Steve Saunders about the role of operational analytics in the communications services and networking sectors, particularly in relation to IoT.
Cats with Phones
Comes With Free Phone Stand Click Here
Who says cats don't have any skills?