February 2015

The Federal Communications Commission is about to usher in the most dramatic government intervention in the Internet in two decades -- heralding a liberal shift toward greater oversight of one of the nation’s most important economic engines. The Commission is expected to vote to approve FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler’s net neutrality plan, which will regulate broadband like a public utility to ensure all Web traffic is treated equally. And it is poised to encourage towns and cities to compete with the dominant telecom companies in providing Internet service to consumers. Taken together, the two moves represent a seismic shift in the relationship between the government and the companies that run the Internet -- and mark the biggest change to communications policy since the 1996 Telecom Act.

“It’s a watershed change,” said Tim Wu, a Columbia Law School professor who’s been deeply involved in the debate and coined the term “net neutrality.” “The chairman is going big, and he’s basically resetting the board on broadband in this country and how the government thinks about it.”

Along with net neutrality and protection of community-run networks, the FCC has been laying the groundwork for its Internet vision in other ways. The FCC approved a new official definition of “broadband,” increasing the threshold to 25 megabits per second for downloads from the previous 4 megabits. The agency called the old standard inadequate to evaluate high-speed Internet service, which today has to support to support a flood of data, voice services and video.

The least settled issue in the government’s new net neutrality rules is the one that put the debate back on the front burner in the first place -- how much carriers like Verizon Communications can charge companies like Netflix to connect with their networks. New Federal Communications Commission rules are expected to be clear on what happens to traffic sent across Internet service providers’ networks: It can’t be blocked or sped up for a fee, and it will be governed by the same regulatory apparatus used to oversee telephone service. But they are far less clear on how much network owners can charge Internet companies to connect with them in the first place.

While the rules would prevent Verizon from charging Netflix for faster service across its network, they will allow it to charge for higher-capacity connections at the front gate. The FCC is dipping a toe into regulating such arrangements by allowing companies to file complaints if they think they’re being treated unfairly. The commission will review the arrangements on a case-by-case basis to determine whether they’re “just and reasonable.” But it hasn’t signaled what sorts of terms might not clear the bar. Even that tentative move is putting the FCC in hotly contested territory.

[Commentary] It's a sad state of affairs for U.S. innovation policy when one has to explain the reason subjecting the supercomputers in our suit pockets to regulations written for rotary phones is a bad idea. And the mobile future dims for all of us when these painfully obvious proof points fall on deaf ears at the Federal Communications Commission. Yet this is where we stand.

Internet giants like Amazon, Yelp and Netflix are popping Champagne corks celebrating the FCC's imminent decision to declare the nation's broadband infrastructure -- the crown jewel of our innovation economy--nothing more than a regulated utility, like the local gas, electric or water company. We all support an open Internet. Indeed, we all enjoy it today -- which begs the obvious question of why the White House and the FCC are so dead-set on such expansive new rules. That ringing sound? It's the 1960s calling. They want their rotary phones back. For consumers, our economy and American innovation, we shouldn't hesitate to hand them over.

[Spalter is chair of Mobile Future which represents technology and communications companies like AT&T and Verizon]

The Electronic Privacy Information Center has asked the Federal Trade Commission to investigate Samsung over what it says is the recording of private conversations in homes through the company’s television sets. The privacy rights group filed a complaint with the commission accusing Samsung of violating federal laws with a technology that allows viewers to operate the company’s Internet-connected smart TVs with voice commands.

In its complaint, EPIC accused Samsung of violating several laws intended to protect consumer privacy, including the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, which prohibits the interception and disclosure of electronic communications, and the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, which regulates collection of personal information from minors. The group asked the FTC to investigate Samsung, halt its practice of transmitting voice recordings to third parties and examine other companies involved in similar practices.