Net Neutrality

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski layered compromise upon compromise to get the commission's approval Tuesday for a Net neutrality proposal that at least some major Internet and telecommunications companies can live with. Those compromises disappointed advocates of a strong rule, and they weren't enough to placate Republicans who oppose the very idea of regulating broadband providers. Nevertheless, the result is both workable and necessary. At issue is the control broadband providers such as AT&T and Comcast can wield over the content, services and applications that are available online.

The Senate voted to keep in place federal rules aimed at preserving open Internet access for online users, but hurdles still loom for the controversial policy. The so-called net neutrality regulations, enacted last year by the Federal Communications Commission, face a legal challenge from Verizon Communications Inc. and other opponents in a court that overturned the agency's last attempt to deal with the issue. "Net neutrality lives or dies depending on what the court does," said Jeffrey Silva, a telecommunications analyst with Medley Global Advisors.

The Senate is expected to decide as early as Wednesday whether to throw out the Federal Communication Commission's "net neutrality" rules before they go into effect Nov. 20. The stakes are high for the phone and cable companies that sell Internet access services, as well as the companies that offer content and services through the Internet. To get a grip on the issue, it's important to understand what prompted the FCC to act and what it's actually done. First, however, let's cover the basics.

The Senate is expected to decide as early as Wednesday whether to throw out the Federal Communication Commission's "net neutrality" rules before they go into effect Nov. 20. The stakes are high for the phone and cable companies that sell Internet access services, as well as the companies that offer content and services through the Internet. To get a grip on the issue, it's important to understand what prompted the FCC to act and what it's actually done. First, however, let's cover the basics.

Here's an entry in my bizspeak-to-English dictionary: When executives in certain industries talk about needing to be rid of regulation so they can foster "better customer service," they're really talking about safeguarding their income. Case in point: the cable and telecommunications industry, and the concept of network neutrality. Net neutrality, broadly speaking, is the principle that any Internet service provider, such as your cable or phone company, should be largely blind to whatever data flow to your computer from the websites you access -- your service provider shouldn't interfere with your Web searches, say, by giving Google preferential routing (and thus faster speed to you)

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski's first major initiative — a proposal to require broadband providers to give equal treatment to all legal Web traffic — is foundering. The chairman sought a compromise with opponents of the proposed "Net neutrality" rules, holding a series of talks with major Internet service providers and Web companies. But the commission halted the discussions Thursday as reports spread that Google and Verizon, which have been negotiating privately for almost a year, were about to propose their own, less regulatory framework for Net neutrality.

Federal regulators are giving up efforts to negotiate a compromise between Web companies and Internet service providers over so-called net neutrality rules intended to prevent discrimination in the way online traffic is treated. The Federal Communications Commission said Thursday it would no longer try brokering a deal among various phone, cable TV and Internet companies, saying that weeks of talks had not "generated a robust framework to preserve openness and freedom of the Internet."

A federal appeals court reined in the Federal Communications Commission this week, ruling that it overstepped its authority when it penalized Comcast for surreptitiously disabling a popular technology that let people share files online. But the ruling did not quell the commission's interest in regulating the way Internet service providers such as Comcast manage their networks. Instead, it set up a potential fight over whether the commission's regulatory authority should be expanded, either by Congress or the commission itself.

The Senate voted to keep in place federal rules aimed at preserving open Internet access for online users, but hurdles still loom for the controversial policy. The so-called net neutrality regulations, enacted last year by the Federal Communications Commission, face a legal challenge from Verizon Communications Inc. and other opponents in a court that overturned the agency's last attempt to deal with the issue. "Net neutrality lives or dies depending on what the court does," said Jeffrey Silva, a telecommunications analyst with Medley Global Advisors.

The Federal Communications Commission has come up with a new way to apply some net neutrality rules that would force Comcast Corp., AT&T Inc. and other broadband Internet service providers to handle all Web traffic the same, without imposing limits on users or blocking websites. Its proposal released Thursday is aimed at blunting an April federal appeals court ruling involving Comcast that found the agency had limited authority to regulate broadband Internet service. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said in a statement that the Comcast decision had created a "serious problem" and that his agency believes more regulation of broadband Internet service is needed, though not the heavier restrictions that apply to telephone companies.

The fight over the Federal Communications Commission's net neutrality rules is often billed as a battle over whether to regulate the Internet. In reality, it's more of a debate over how to preserve the Web's defining features. Opponents say the rules, which are slated to take effect Nov. 20, will stifle the investment and innovation that have characterized the Internet since its inception. Proponents say the opposite, arguing that the rules deter service providers from turning the innovative, vibrant online world into a cable-TV-like service dominated by powerful commercial interests.

Republicans are so determined to block the Federal Communications Commission's proposed Net neutrality rules that they're pulling out a little-used law that gives Congress the chance to second-guess federal agencies before their regulations go into effect. The GOP's argument is that the Internet has thrived without government regulation, so there's no reason to start now. That's a fine sentiment, but the point of the rules is to protect the Net from being manipulated by the handful of giant phone and cable TV companies that dominate the market for home broadband services.

The Federal Communications Commission's controversial new Net neutrality rules aim to stop broadband providers from discriminating against legal sites and services online, as well as to require more clarity about the providers' terms and conditions. Now mobile phone carrier MetroPCS is presenting the first test: a $40 "unlimited" mobile broadband service that blocks video streams from all but one site, YouTube. The problem isn't really what MetroPCS is offering, however. It's what the company is telling consumers, and how the precedent it has set might redefine the meaning of Internet access.

Verizon Communications Inc. has taken to federal court its attempt to stop the Federal Communications Commission's controversial new rules to guarantee open Internet access. In a widely expected move, the telecommunications giant told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that the FCC exceeded its authority when it enacted regulations last month to ensure so-called net neutrality. The regulations forbid owners of high-speed lines and airwaves from favoring their services over competitors'.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski layered compromise upon compromise to get the commission's approval Tuesday for a Net neutrality proposal that at least some major Internet and telecommunications companies can live with. Those compromises disappointed advocates of a strong rule, and they weren't enough to placate Republicans who oppose the very idea of regulating broadband providers. Nevertheless, the result is both workable and necessary. At issue is the control broadband providers such as AT&T and Comcast can wield over the content, services and applications that are available online.

After years of debate, the Federal Communications Commission adopted the first-ever regulations to forbid owners of high-speed lines and airwaves from favoring their services over competitors. The rules are aimed at preserving open access to the Internet and allowing consumers the continued, unfettered use of such online services as Netflix and Hulu video and Skype and Vonage phone. The FCC's action, in a 3-2 vote Tuesday along party lines, comes as consumers are increasingly using broadband Internet connections for both wired and wireless devices to watch TV shows, movies and video snippets ?

Federal officials are set to enact the first broad regulations covering high-speed Internet access amid a heated debate about whether the rules would preserve the online world or destroy it. The vote by the Federal Communications Commission is the culmination of more than five years of battling over how best to preserve the free flow of information that has transformed the Internet from an obscure government network to an economic powerhouse....