Peter Davidson

In the context of network interconnection, communications policymakers have the benefit of a real-world experiment with two very different approaches to interconnection, which have existed in parallel for decades.

One model is the proscriptive regulatory approach that governs traditional voice communications. The other is the IP interconnection model in which commercial negotiations have created a flexible, adaptable network ecosystem that has seen unprecedented innovation and investment. This voluntary, commercial interconnection model has been nothing short of a tremendous success.

In the IP interconnection model, each service provider negotiates an agreement with several other providers, the terms of which vary according to the networks’ needs. Because there are multiple paths (aside from direct interconnection) available for any one provider to reach another, there are no compulsory agreements and each party is assumed to receive equitable value from an agreement to connect. IP interconnection has allowed for innovation and flexibility in response to changes in end users’ demands.

If there’s one fact that communications policy experts can agree on, it’s this: the communications landscape has changed dramatically since Congress last visited the Communications Act in 1996. T

he evolution in technology, computation, software and competition has been accompanied by a seismic shift in consumer preferences. Unlike their more heavily regulated counterparts, most of competitors have not been subject to the same legacy regulatory regime, which often requires permission to introduce new services and features or to move away from others that fail to meet consumer demands.

This is not to suggest that the same type of prescriptive regulation that traditionally was applied to legacy voice providers now should apply to newer competitors and services from the other “silos.” Just the opposite: consumers will benefit most if Congress adopts a new policy framework that more accurately reflects the nature of competition in today’s communications marketplace and provides all companies in the communication and Internet ecosystem with the flexibility necessary to encourage innovation and investment, while simultaneously protecting consumer interests.

In short, a modern definition and approach to communications policy should embrace the dynamic competition in today’s market, while allowing for future innovations and market participants. Dismantling the regulatory “silos” is the first step toward a modern communications policy framework that enables service providers to give their customers more of everything.