Government To Enforce 'Net Neutrality' Principle

Should websites like Netflix pay extra fees to deliver their Internet-based services to the public?

The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) says no. Tom Wheeler says that broadband should be treated like a utility, such as phone services; in doing so, it will help to protect Internet freedoms. Critics, however, suggest that such a plan would be unworkable.

Tom Wheeler's announcement has to do with the principle of net neutrality. That's the idea where Internet Service Providers (ISPs) should treat all Internet traffic (except for illegal content) equally. In other words, ISPs would not be able to block or slow down particular traffic, and would not be able to charge websites extra fees to make connections to a particular site or service run faster.

Supporters of net neutrality say that this fundamental concept allows small websites and services a fighting chance while competing with larger rivals. Many ISPs are opposed to the idea of net neutrality, however. For example, several believe that firms such as Netflix which deliver a large amount of Internet traffic, benefit disproportionately from high speed Internet connections, and should pay fees to the carrier towards those costs.

Net Neutrality Already Government Policy

Upholding net neutrality is an official stated policy of the US government, but it has ran into difficulties in recent years. The FCC brought in new rules to regulate Internet carriers in 2010, but those rules were thrown out by an appeals court last year after a challenge by Verizon.

The problem is that back in 2002, the FCC officially classed broadband as an information service (known legally as 'Title I'), meaning it comes under looser regulations than telecommunications services ('Title II'), such as ordinary telephone lines. The court ruled that the FCC doesn't have the powers to force Internet carriers to treat all traffic equally.

After a year of speculation, Wheeler has now confirmed that he proposes reclassifying broadband as a Title II service, essentially providing the FCC the ability to enforce the net neutrality rules. (Source: wired.com)

Legal Challenge Looks Likely

While that ends one front in the legal battle, it opens up another. Several broadband providers, including Verizon, have threatened legal action. They will likely make two arguments: that the FCC simply doesn't have the authority to make this change without Congressional approval, and that the change would give the FCC too much power over the Internet. (Source: cnet.com)

In response, Wheeler says the FCC will tweak the regulatory powers that come with of Title II to be more relevant to broadband. In particular, he says the FCC will not have the power to control or influence how much Internet providers charge customers, unlike the way phone service charges are regulated.

What's Your Opinion?

Is the FCC right to make this change? Should the government force providers to treat all Internet traffic equally? Or should this be an issue for a totally free market, where firms willing to pay can get an advantage in reaching users and customers?