Arthur Belendiuk: Open Internet Rules Don’t Go Far Enough

A petition for reconsideration of the Federal Communications Commission’s Open Internet Order. The petition asks the FCC to reconsider its decision, arguing that its “clear, bright line” rules are too narrow, and that its forbearance from key provisions of Title II goes too far. Specifically,

• The Open Internet Order banned paid prioritization and prioritization of affiliate traffic. The rule does not address unpaid prioritization of traffic. As common carriers, however, broadband operators are responsible for transmitting content indifferently, and may not favor any sender’s content. The FCC leaves far too much to be decided on an individual case basis. On reconsideration, the FCC must adopt a clear, bright line rule outlawing all forms of preferential treatment, including the so-called “sponsored data” plans, such as T-Mobile’s Music Freedom.
• On reconsideration, the FCC must provide a clear directive to broadband providers to comply with last mile interconnection requirements. In the Open Internet Order, the FCC found that broadband providers have gatekeeper control and the motivation to compromise Internet openness. The FCC effectively reversed its previous decisions that broadband is an information service, yet did not take the next step to require broadband providers to offer stand-alone transmission over the last mile to competitors.
• The Open Internet Order forbears from the Truth-in-Billing rules that took the FCC years to develop. On reconsideration the FCC must reinstate these rules, which are critical to consumer protection.
• The FCC’s decision to forbear from applying the Universal Service Fund (“USF”) contribution requirements to broadband providers is unsupported and \unjustified. The thousand small telephone companies that have kept broadband under tariff since 2005 for administrative convenience are required to contribute to the USF; large broadband providers must be made to share in this obligation.
• The FCC’s enforcement mechanisms tailored for open Internet matters, particularly the new advisory opinion process, do not provide for participation by members of the public and therefore lend themselves to secret dealings with the large broadband providers. On reconsideration the FCC must modify these processes to include adequate public disclosure and participation.