Michael Weinberg

[Commentary] The website TmoNews broke the story that T-Mobile is planning on throttling customers who use bittorrent on their wireless connections. Back in 2007, Comcast decided to start throttling bittorrent as well.

After a formal complaint and investigation, the Federal Communications Commission found that Comcast’s decision to single out bittorrent for blocking violated the open Internet rules that were in place at the time. And yet, strangely, T-Mobile has decided to revive this practice by singling out heavy data users who are making use of peer-to-peer applications.

Which only makes our point that we need strong network neutrality even stronger. This is about what FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler calls the “Network Compact.”

Public Knowledge sent letters to AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon as the first step in the process of filing open Internet complaints against each of them at the Federal Communications Commisson.

The letters address violations of the FCC’s transparency requirements, which are the only part of the open Internet rules that survived court challenge.

Specifically, they call on AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon to make information available about which subscribers have their wireless data connections throttled and where that throttling happens.

The letter to T-Mobile calls on it to stop exempting speed test apps from its practice of throttling some users, thus preventing them from understanding actual network speeds available to them.

These letters are the first step in the open Internet rule formal complaint process. Once ten days have passed, PK can file a formal complaint to the FCC. At that point, AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon will each have an opportunity to reply to the complaint, and PK will have the opportunity to reply to that reply.

Of course, that process can stop at any time. As soon as AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile and or Verizon comply with the transparency rule, PK will drop our complaint.

[Commentary] T-Mobile’s announcement that they will exempt a handful of music streaming services from their data cap is but the latest example of ISPs using data caps to undermine network neutrality.

T-Mobile now joins Comcast, AT&T, and AT&T again as an ISP that uses data caps as a pretext to manipulate how its users experience the Internet. Unlike other carriers, T-Mobile does not have a data cap with overage penalties. Instead, when users hit their cap they find their connection slowed significantly.

While this type of throttling is probably preferable to huge overage fees, it still exerts a strong influence on what types of services T-Mobile subscribers use online. This influence is strengthened enormously when certain apps or certain content is exempted from the cap -- a practice known as “zero rating.”

This type of gatekeeping interference by ISPs is exactly what net neutrality rules should be designed to prevent. Furthermore, T-Mobile’s announcement once again calls into question the purpose of data caps at all.

At Public Knowledge we welcomed the debut of the Authors Alliance.

The Authors Alliance is made up of authors who are concerned that many efforts to strengthen copyright have failed them.

We hope the Authors Alliance will help highlight all of those all too easily forgotten aspects of the copyright policy debate. The Alliance is made up of authors -- “creators” in the classic dichotomy -- who don’t necessarily believe that increasing the scope and strength of copyright is the only way to improve it. Of course, that does not mean that members of the Alliance believe that copyright could not benefit from reform.

In fact, the Alliance is debuting four principles to guide copyright reform:

• Further Empower Authors to Disseminate Their Works
• Improve Information Flows About Copyright Ownership
• Affirm the Vitality of Limits on Copyright that Enable Us to Do Our Work and Research
• Ensure that Copyright’s Remedies and Enforcement Mechanisms Protect Our Interests

[Commentary] The Federal Communications Commission just released its proposed open Internet (net neutrality) rules. Although both Chairman Wheeler and the proposal extensively discuss the problems that occur when ISPs get to choose winners and losers online, the proposed rules still create fast lanes and slow lanes on the Internet.

Everything starts with what the order describes as a “minimum level of access.” This is the slow lane. Once you get outside of this minimum level of access, ISPs have a lot more flexibility to start cutting deals. This is the fast lane. The proposed rules try to define “commercially reasonable” by using a multi-factor test.

These factors include the impact on present and future competition, the impact on consumers, the impact on speech and civic engagement, technical characteristics, “good faith” negotiation, industry practices, and “other factors.” Some kinds of discrimination will qualify as being commercially reasonable. The result of this structure is a two-tier Internet: a minimum level of access that ISPs cannot degrade, and a premium lane with plenty of flexibility for deal making.

We're pleased to see the Chairman recognize Title II as a legitimate option for going forward with strong net neutrality rules.

We are also encouraged to hear him reiterate his opposition to fast lanes on the Internet, and his recognition that all Americans deserve access to a 'broadly available, fast and robust' web experiences. We welcome the debate that appears to be taking form in the proposal that the FCC will reveal on May 15.

We look forward to commenting on the record to prove that Title II is needed for strong net neutrality rules. It's hard to understand how the FCC's proposal, as reported, can allow avenues for paid prioritization and yet still serve as a pillar for net neutrality.

Standards that allow the web to have two lanes, with one for preferred traffic, seem to go against the principles that the FCC and the Chairman himself have said they stand for. We look forward to working with the Commission in the coming months to demonstrate why fast lanes are incompatible with net neutrality.