FCC's net neutrality rules under attack by the GOP

The GOP is wasting no time in beginning work to detail the net neutrality rules just outlined by the FCC. While most who have analyzed the rules feel they really are essentially toothless, some are portraying it as a government takeover of the Internet.

Net neutrality, which is the concept that all traffic on the Internet be treated the same, is a founding principle of the Internet, as noted by Tim Berners-Lee, who is credited as the father of the Internet, and who strongly supports net neutrality. To many, Comcast's recent moves to charge more for Netflix traffic are just the first of many corporate anti-net neutrality moves, which could lead to such things as consumers paying more for access to Skype or even Facebook. In fact, a recent presentation showed that such proposals are already ongoing.

That's just the tip of the iceberg in terms of the possibilities. Many have also expressed concern that existing corporations could work to block start-ups' access to the Internet.

Despite this, Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) this week re-introduced the oddly-named "Internet Freedom Act" (.PDF), which is designed to prevent the FCC from enacting net neutrality rules. Toothless or not, the FCC could always toughen the rules in the future.

The definition of a corporation is what drives concern over letting corporations self-regulate. After all, a corporation must, by law, attempt to maximize profits for its shareholders. With a little common sense, one can see that maximization for profits for, say, Comcast, could include throttling or even blocking Netflix, so Comcast could promote its own Xfinity service.

A statement on Blackburn's website claim the rules are a "hysterical reaction to the hypothetical problem of anti-competitive online behavior." Comcast's moves show the problem is not hypothetical.

Poll: only 21 percent of Americans support Net Neutrality, but they may not understand it

A poll by Rasmussen Reports seems to indicate that only 21 percent of those surveyed are in favor of the FCC's net neutrality regulations. However, some are wondering if the questions were worded in such a way as to skew the answers from an uninformed public in a certain direction.

The Rasmussen Report questions were worded as follows:

1. How closely have you followed stories about Internet neutrality issues?
2. Should the Federal Communications Commission regulate the Internet like it does radio and television?
3. What is the best way to protect those who use the Internet—more government regulation or more free market competition?
4. If the Federal Communications Commission is given the authority to regulate the Internet, will they use that power in an unbiased manner or will they use it to promote a political agenda?

Net neutrality can be boiled down to a simple concept: all traffic on the Internet is treated the same, without regard for origin or type. That has been the guiding principle of the Internet since its inception, and no less than Tim Berners-Lee, credited as the father of the Internet, said it should remain so.

The questions above seem to skirt the issue. In fact, question two, if analyzed, really asks if you want the FCC to derail net neutrality, if you read the true definition above. Thus, this survey, of 1,000 likely voters conducted Dec. 23 (when you are bound to find technology experts ready to talk on the phone instead of last-minute shopping), seems confusing.

There are a few key issues noted by technologists, remembering, of course, that by definition corporations must attempt to maximize the return to their shareholders:

1. An ISP such as Comcaat is also a content provider. How hard is it to imagine Comcast throttling Netflix traffic so as to promote its own Xfinity services? Answer: not hard. In fact, Comcast is already known to be charging a premium for Netflix traffic.
2. Those who have successfully created Internet giants may seek to similarly throttle the content of start-ups, so as to maintain to their "lead" in the market. Is that hard to imagine? Answer: not hard.
3. Comcast is trying to buy NBC. Any idea what might happen to streaming NBC content on the Internet, for those not using Comcast as an ISP?

There are numerous other such examples which could be brought to light.

It could be said that the free market could self-regulate the Internet. Despite the fact that the self-regulated financial industry brought the U.S. the Great Recession, some make this argument. That might be true if there were numerous choices.

However, the majority of markets have few choices, perhaps one DSL and one cable company. If that cable company is Comcast, once again the Netflix example comes to the fore. Sure, DSL is a possibility, but DSL service is generally far slower than cable service. Don't even bring up satellite "pseudo-broadband," AKA the choice if you have none other.

As we've discussed for years, the reason that U.S. broadband trails badly in speed and price, far behind many other countries, is because the country has insufficient competition. Relying on the free market will simply result in a Great Recession in Internet innovation.

Rasmussen Reports has been criticized in the past for leaning right. As their Wikipedia entry says:

TIME has described Rasmussen Reports as a "conservative-leaning polling group". The Center For Public Integrity has pointed out that Scott Rasmussen was a paid consultant for the 2004 George W. Bush campaign. According to Nate Silver's FiveThirtyEight.com, while there are no apparent records of Scott Rasmussen or Rasmussen Reports making contributions to political candidates in recent years and its public election polls are generally regarded as reliable, "some observers have questioned its issue-based polling, which frequently tends to elicit responses that are more conservative than those found on other national surveys."

Instead of the Rasmussen Reports' survey, perhaps two questions:

1. "Do you want all Internet traffic treated the same regardless of content or origin?"
2. "Do you want ISPs to be able to block or remove content based only on their own discretion?"

We'd like to see the results of that survey.