Senate Network Neutrality Hearing Recap

FUTURE OF THE INTERNET HEARING
Senate Network Neutrality Hearing Recap

_Testimony/Statements_
Chairman Inouye: Broadband and the Benefits of the Internet Should Reach All Americans
FCC Chairman Kevin Martin
Public Knowledge Commends Martin On Internet Enforcement Policy
Professor Lawrence Lessig
Michele Combs -- Christian Coalition of America
Robert Hahn -- American Enterprise Institute
Patric Verrone -- Writers Guild of America, West
Justine Bateman -- Actress / Writer / Producer
Kyle McSlarrow -- National Cable & Telecommunications Association

SENATE NETWORK NEUTRALITY HEARING RECAP
[SOURCE: Benton Foundation]
Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin and others testified before the Senate Commerce Committee Tuesday. Chairman Martin fought a bit with lawmakers over whether the FCC has the authority to punish Comcast over charges that it blocks certain kinds of Internet traffic -- a practice Chairman Martin said is more widespread than the company had previously acknowledged. Martin said Comcast's blocking of BitTorrent peer-to-peer traffic appeared to happen when there wasn't network congestion, in contrast to claims from the broadband provider. Comcast's actions, first described by the Associated Press last October, appeared to "block uploads of a significant portion of subscribers" in that part of the network, even during times when the network wasn't congested, Martin said. Chairman Martin resisted calls by Democratic members of the committee to pass a network neutrality law, saying the FCC now has the authority to act on network blocking complaints on a case-by-case basis. The FCC in 2005 adopted a set of open Internet policy principles, and it has responded to traffic-blocking complaints, Martin said. Sen John Kerry (D-MA) is concerned the FCC may face lawsuits if it enforces its Network Neutrality principles without new legislation from Congress. Senate Republicans voiced opposition to new legislation, with Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) saying that "intense regulation" of the Internet would be "entirely unwarranted."
(See links to sources below)

_Testimony/Statements_

Chairman Inouye Seeks to Ensure Broadband and the Benefits of the Internet Reach All Americans
[SOURCE: US Senate Commerce Committee, AUTHOR: Sen Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii)]
Along with the problems facing individual Americans as they navigate the digital world, there are also challenges facing those who provide services and content via the Internet, and those who build and manage the network infrastructure necessary for the continued expansion and improvement of the Internet. I believe that the government has a responsibility to create a regulatory environment that will one day enable each and every American to have affordable access to reliable broadband service. To achieve this long-term goal, I have introduced the Broadband Data Improvement Act. This act is designed to give us a starting point. It will better define what broadband is, and it will provide us with accurate information on the current status of broadband deployment in the United States. This information is essential if we are to chart the most responsible course toward universal broadband deployment. Another significant responsibility of our government is to ensure that the Internet continues to grow and thrive. The issue of Network Neutrality, and its offspring, nondiscrimination and network management, looms large in this debate. The central question here seems to be how to best balance the right of the American people to uncensored and unfettered access to Internet content and services against the desire of Internet service providers to manage their networks in an efficient and profitable manner. For several years now, policy discussions on this subject have been waged on a rhetorical battlefield. We are told that nothing less than the Future of the Internet is at stake. Yet even in this winner-take-all environment, we see the inklings of progress: the dialogue between cable and peer-to-peer services, the novel open access requirements on the C-block spectrum, and the swift response of a wireless provider to a text messaging snafu that thwarted political speech. It may be early for optimism, but progress deserves praise. In the meantime, I can assure you that this Committee will continue to vigorously exercise its oversight authority over this important issue.
http://commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Hearings.Statemen...

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin
[SOURCE: Federal Communications Commission, AUTHOR: FCC Chairman Kevin Martin]
Contrary to some public claims about Commission's approach generally, for the Commission to take enforcement action against a telephone company for blocking and degrading a particular application but refuse to pursue enforcement action against a cable company blocking or degrading a particular application would unfairly favor the cable industry. I believe that the Commission must remain vigilant in protecting consumers' access to content on the internet. Thus, it is critically important that the Commission take seriously and respond to complaints that are filed about arbitrary limits on broadband access and potential violations of our principles. Indeed, I have publicly stated that the Commission stands ready to enforce this policy statement and protect consumers' access to the internet.... The Commission should address issues of appropriate network management using a consistent framework. There are several factors that I believe the Commission should use when analyzing complaints and concerns about network management practices by broadband operators: 1) The Commission should consider whether the network management practices are intended to distinguish between legal and illegal activity. 2) The Commission should consider whether the network service provider adequately disclosed its network management practices. 3) The Commission should consider whether the network management technique arbitrarily blocks or degrades a particular application.
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-281690A1.doc

Public Knowledge Commends Martin On Internet Enforcement Policy
[SOURCE: Public Knowledge, AUTHOR: Gigi Sohn]
FCC Chairman Kevin Martin’s testimony today before the Senate Commerce Committee was right on the money when he said that the Commission should take very seriously whether Internet network management by a cable or telephone company ‘arbitrarily blocks or degrades a particular application.’ By saying there should be ‘heightened scrutiny’ if it appears that a telephone or cable company is selectively picking out some applications for special treatment, Martin put the companies on notice that their management techniques need to ‘further a compelling or at least an important/legitimate interest would need to be tailored to fit the exact interest.’ The chairman’s remarks mean that Comcast and other companies are out of bounds when they target a particular protocol, such as peer-to-peer applications, for throttling regardless of the time of day (or night) or the traffic levels on the network. While we continue to support legislation to make certain that the Internet is guided by non-discrimination principles that are well established in law, we are encouraged by the chairman’s statement today that the he is willing to defend some measure of non-discrimination in proceedings before the agency.
http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/1533

Professor Lawrence Lessig
[AUTHOR: Lawrence Lessig]
[W]hile [Network Neutrlaity] questions are not new, in my view, Congress has yet to address them adequately. For the reasons I outline below, this failure to act continues to threaten the growth and economic vitality of the Internet. Thus, I would urge Congress to enact legislation that sets the basic framework for this critical economic infrastructure in a way that assures the greatest innovation and economic growth. That framework would embed a design principle that gave birth to the Internet — network neutrality. In addressing the question before this Committee, I would offer four points to consider. 1) The question of effective regulation for critical economic infrastructure did not begin with the Internet. 2) Policymakers should adopt policies that drive network providers towards business models of broadband abundance rather than business models that exploit scarcity. 3) Investment decisions by venture capitalists are driven by expectations of future, not present, behavior. 4) Congress should direct the FCC to implement, with the minimal regulatory intervention necessary, a policy that drives network providers to a business model of abundance.
http://commerce.senate.gov/public/_files/LessigTestimony.pdf

Michele Combs -- Christian Coalition of America
[SOURCE: Christian Coalition of America, AUTHOR: Michele Combs]
The Christian Coalition does not seek burdensome regulations. We generally believe that less government is better than more government. And, we do not believe that governments should censor speech. But let’s be clear. Right now, the telephone and cable companies are investing in and using the exact same censorship and content discrimination technologies that are being used by the Chinese government to censor speech. In fact, the Chinese government is currently using these same technologies to block the Christian Coalition’s speech from being received by its citizens. The Christian Coalition is merely asking Congress to create simple rules of the road that make it clear that it will allow cable and phone companies to block the lawful speech rights of the Christian Coalition and others.
http://commerce.senate.gov/public/_files/ChristianCoalitionStatementfort...

Robert Hahn -- American Enterprise Institute
[SOURCE: American Enterprise Institute, AUTHOR: Dr. Robert Hahn]
In its short history, the Internet has grown at an astounding pace. Legislators have
the ability to dramatically affect the future of Internet growth and innovation. Legislators should carefully weigh the benefits and costs of regulatory policies. The economic issues raised in the network neutrality and network management debates can be effectively addressed by using antitrust authority where appropriate, allowing Internet pricing flexibility, and fostering more efficient use of spectrum to facilitate entry into the broadband market. Government should allow firms to experiment with different business models for Internet services. Allowing such market flexibility is likely to be the best way to ensure efficient innovation on the information superhighway.
http://commerce.senate.gov/public/_files/HahnSenateTestimony408V17.pdf

Patric Verrone -- Writers Guild of America, West
[SOURCE: Writers Guild of America, West , AUTHOR: Patric Verrone]
The axiom in Hollywood is that "content is king." But those who control access to the king control the kingdom. Because of federal regulation -- or lack thereof -- that control is in the hands of neither the consumer nor the content creators, but the distributors.... the policy decisions that triggered the consolidation of old media has not yet been made for the new media. There is still time to protect the rights of content producers and consumers. We need to establish clear Net neutrality rules to ensure that the Internet remains a level playing field for all. We dethrone the gatekeepers and once more make content king.
http://commerce.senate.gov/public/_files/Pverronetestimonysenatecommerce...

Justine Bateman -- Actress / Writer / Producer
[AUTHOR: Justine Bateman]
In entertainment, I believe we are on the verge of a creative renaissance and the Internet is the new grid upon which this renaissance can rest, because unfortunately the business grid of TV and film today cannot support that. Traditional media is now like a pool over which a pool cover has been placed causing those wild ducks that used to swim around in your pool to go elsewhere. Those ducks now I’m sure have found an open body of water in which to swim, much like we content creators have been found open distribution on the Internet. And the idea of your site succeeding or failing based upon whether or not you paid the telecom companies enough to carry your material or allow quick access is appalling. Honestly, I can’t help but think of extortion when I imagine that kind of arrangement. Net neutrality will allow for we creators to continue owning and controlling our content in a way that we have not been able to since the repeal of the financial and syndication rules. A whole new class of small business owners will emerge, providing thousands of new jobs in a sector that desperately needs them. And with innovation comes competition. Net neutrality would insure a level playing field for that.
http://commerce.senate.gov/public/_files/jbatemantestimonysenatecommerce...

Kyle McSlarrow -- National Cable & Telecommunications Association
[SOURCE: National Cable & Telecommunications Association, AUTHOR: Kyle McSlarrow]
[W]hile broadband deployment to every community in America merits the full attention of policymakers, legislation calling for “network neutrality” or government intervention into the operation of networks would undermine the goals of broadband deployment and adoption. The development of the Internet, expansion of broadband networks, and creation of innovative Internet applications we have seen would not have occurred at such a rapid pace if providers were restricted in how they could engineer their networks to accommodate these dynamic developments. The government’s consistent light regulatory touch since the introduction of broadband has worked. And only that continued regulatory freedom is likely to spur the investment and innovation that consumers have come to expect.
http://commerce.senate.gov/public/_files/McSlarrowTestimony_April222008_...