House Deals Blow to Net Neutrality; COPE Would Also Change Cable

Almost a third of the Democrats in the House joined Republicans Thursday and sided with telecom and cable giants over internet commerce and consumers. In so doing, the House overwhelmingly rejected (269-152) an amendment which would have codified internet neutrality (a prohibition on packet discrimination). (tip)

The amendment, offered by Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA), would have "restore[d] important non-discrimination requirements enforced by the Federal Communications Commission that from the inception of the Internet until August of 2005 [that] were binding on telecommunications carriers."

Net neutrality means that Internet service providers and network owners concern themselves only with efficiently moving bits -- not with the content embodied by the bits.

Those supporting network neutrality range from gun owners to librarians. Those opposing codification of network neutrality tend to be libertarian think tanks. Those advocating discriminatory systems are telecos and cable firms, in the main.

Common Carrier Rules
According to CIO, "The telecommunications laws that have governed the Internet since its inception require network owners to treat all traffic the same. The laws date to the 1930s and were put in place to force telephone companies to prevent a scenario where one company could refuse to carry calls placed by a rival's customer."

These laws are called "common carrier rules." If you believe that common carrier rules are necessary (the Interstate Commerce Commission was the first regulatory agency in the country and was created in response to railroad abuses that led to the first common carrier regulation), then you probably support net neutrality.

However, CIO continues: "[A] Supreme Court ruling and a series of Federal Communications Commission (FCC) decisions have eliminated this barrier, prompting Congress to rewrite the nation's telecommunications laws."

Telecom and cable companies want to generate revenue from two sources: the content provider and the consumer. Right now, there is nothing to prohibit broadband companies from charging customers based on usage rather than with a flat monthly fee.

But the US already has more expensive broadband than (gasp) France -- about $20 per megabit versus $1.80 per megabit, according to the Wall Street Journal. So our "all you can eat" model yields overpriced and slow service. Yet the telecos want more.

Net Pioneers Support Neutrality
Vint Cerf, the father of the Internet, told Congress that "allowing broadband carriers to control what people see and do online would fundamentally undermine the principles that have made the Internet such a success."

And Tim Berners-Lee, the father of the web, said in May that Net neutrality was needed. He pointed out that "if you look back 20 years ... you realize we are in an embryonic stage of the Web from many points of view." Speaking at an international Web conference in Scotland, he said, "I hope that the U.S. will come to the right decision."

Major Changes in Cable Structure
The bill under consideration is called the Communications Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhancement (COPE) Act of 2006, HB 5252. It would amend the Telecommunications Act of 1996. It also would change the way cable is regulated.

So even if the future of internet infrastructure causes your eyes to glaze over, there are other very important features of this bill that affect you!

• It would set up a national franchise for cable companies, replacing the current system of locally negotiated contracts.
• It would preempt state and local consumer protection laws; preempt local government authority over municipal rights of way; and preempt state laws prohibiting local governments from offering certain services to provide Internet access.

That's why city governments are voicing their concern/opposition to the bill. In fact, the bill has an extremely wide-ranging group of opponents -- David, as it were, against the Goliath that is teleco and cable.

Vote Details
Republicans voting for the amendment:
Burton (IN), Davis, Tom, Fitzpatrick (PA), Leach, Regula, Reichert, Sensenbrenner, Shays, Wolf.

Democrats voting against the amendment:
Ackerman, Baca, Barrow, Berry, Bishop (GA), Boren, Boswell, Boyd, Brady (PA), Brown (Corrine), Butterfield, Cardoza, Carnahan, Clay, Cleaver, Clyburn, Costa, Cramer, Crowley, Cuellar, Cummings, Davis (AL), Davis (IL), Davis (TN), Edwards, Etheridge, Fattah, Gonzalez, Green (Al), Green (Gene), Hastings (FL), Hinojosa, Holden, Jackson-Lee (TX), Jefferson, Johnson, E. B., Larsen (WA), McIntyre, Meek (FL), Meeks (NY), Melancon, Michaud, Millender-McDonald, Mollohan, Moore (KS), Ortiz, Pastor, Rahall, Ruppersberger, Rush, Sanchez (Loretta), Schwartz (PA), Scott (GA), Skelton, Spratt, Tanner, Towns, Wynn.
Not Voting:
Bono, Davis (FL), DeLay, Evans, Gibbons, Kingston, Manzullo, McHugh, Nussle, Peterson (PA), Reyes

See also:

• Net Neutrality Moves to Centerstate In The House
• Network Neutrality: The Fight for Internet Infrastructure
• COPE and Network Neutrality
• Save The Internet (coalition advocating for codifying net neutrality)

Technorati Profile
Technorati tags: Innovation Net Neutrality, Politics
gada.be tags: Innovation, Net Neutrality, Politics
^{Category: Iraq}