FCC releases all 400 pages of its new net neutrality rules
In the days leading up to the Federal Communications Commission鈥檚 "net neutrality" vote earlier this month, Commissioner Ajit Pai frequently criticized the Commission for not releasing the full text of the Order being voted on. (In point of fact, both Democratic and Republican FCC commissioners have on having a three-week window to deliberate before holding a vote.)
On February 25, Commissioner Pai a picture of himself holding the plan, adding, 鈥淭he public still can鈥檛 see it.鈥�
As of Thursday, the public can now see the order 鈥� all 400 pages of it.
This is the set of rules that reclassifies the Internet as a public utility and broadband Internet providers as 鈥渃ommon carriers鈥� under Title II of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. By classifying providers in this way, the FCC gives itself more power to mandate that providers treat all traffic flowing across their networks more or less equally. Providers may not prioritize certain services or applications over others, nor may they create 鈥渇ast lanes鈥� for those companies willing to pay to have their content delivered to consumers faster. This evenhanded treatment of Internet traffic is what鈥檚 meant by the term 鈥渘et neutrality.鈥�
What鈥檚 most surprising about the bill is the extent to which the FCC won鈥檛 regulate providers. Title II allows it to take measures such as setting retail rates and even mandating that providers lease (or 鈥渦nbundle鈥�) portions of their networks to competitors. But the FCC says it won鈥檛 be doing any of that. More than 700 of the Title II rules won鈥檛 be applied to broadband Internet providers. That means those providers are exempt from tariffing and cost-accounting rules, in addition to rate regulation and mandatory unbundling.
The order also does not make specific rules about interconnect points 鈥� the places at which the networks of content providers meet those of broadband providers, such as Comcast and Verizon. Last year, Netflix paid large sums to both of those companies to be able to hook directly into their networks, bypassing the Internet backbone and avoiding congestion. The order doesn鈥檛 cover those sorts of arrangements; it only says that the FCC can hear interconnection complaints on a case-by-case basis.
The order does allow broadband providers to prioritize traffic in the interest of 鈥渞easonable network management,鈥� but it imposed strict rules concerning what is and is not 鈥渞easonable.鈥� Throttling an application that is slowing down network access for everyone during peak hours might be considered reasonable. Degrading connection speeds to induce customers to upgrade to higher-tier connection plans would not be.
AT&T criticized the order on the grounds that it could disincentivize companies from improving Internet access for their customers. 鈥淯nfortunately, the order released today begins a period of uncertainty that will damage broadband investment in the United States,鈥� AT&T executive Jim Cicconi . 鈥淯ltimately, though, we are confident the issue will be resolved by bipartisan action by Congress or a future FCC, or by the courts.鈥�
