Free the Web — From the FCC!
Posted on August 10, 2008
Excerpt:
“Last year, Comcast tweaked its network-management system to delay slightly the uploading of data through BitTorrent, one of the peer-to-peer services people use to swap movies, music and other large-bandwidth content. Comcast didn’t discriminate against BitTorrent based on the content or, it says, to compete, arguing that it acted under its terms of usage so that consumers overall had the best experience. (Think of how controlling traffic with red lights gets to the ultimate destination faster.) Comcast and BitTorrent agreed in March that Comcast would find other techniques to manage its network. The companies issued a news release saying “these technical issues can be worked out through private business discussions without the need for government intervention.” The FCC didn’t take the hint.
The real problem is how to maintain the Web as a free and open commons, available for all to use in reasonable ways. An article in Britain’s Guardian newspaper put it well: “The family gathers for tea, and there are four cream cakes for four people. If one person grabbed three of them, words would be said. However, peer-to-peer sharers think it’s perfectly OK to grab three quarters of the communal internet bandwidth.”
Instead of offering ways to keep the Web unclogged, the FCC decided that from now on it must approve how Internet service providers manage the fast-changing demands on bandwidth. The rationale suggests that the FCC now thinks of the Web as a “common carrier,” the phrase earlier generations of regulators used to justify government management of industries.
Today’s call for government regulation is under the well-intentioned cry of “net neutrality,” not the more accurate, “Let’s regulate the Web the way they regulated railroads.” If setting reasonable tariffs for railroad freight was overreaching, imagine regulators trying to set reasonable practices or prices for different packets of online data. Do we really want an FCC as modern-day ICC deciding how many YouTube video downloads are reasonable?
Internet service is a competitive business, though cable and telecommunication companies do themselves no favors by occasionally acting like duopolists, and they should disclose their network practices. The key matter of social policy is that the Web needs more investment to keep capacity growing faster than Web developers find ways to use it. This is harder as large-bandwidth movies and music migrate online. It will be harder still if potential investors conclude that pricing and network management will be regulated by anything other than supply and demand.
Government’s role on the Web is to ensure more competition and more consumer choice, not less competition and diminished consumer choice by turning the Web into a regulated industry. The Internet has become one of the most powerful innovations of our time, in part because it hasn’t been burdened by government intervention. Those of us who want to keep the Web free should remember that the best way to keep an industry free is simply to keep it free.
Posted by John Ray. For a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM. For a daily survey of Australian politics, see AUSTRALIAN POLITICS Also, don’t forget your roundup of Obama news and commentary at OBAMA WATCH
» Filed Under 1st Amendment, News
Trackback URL
Comments
One Response to “Free the Web — From the FCC!”
Leave a Reply
The reason for Comcast “throttling” Bittorrent traffic had less to do with giving their customers a better “experience”(If that had been the case, they would focus on streaming video, the real bandwith hog, or even better, expanded the bandwidth and encouraging more fiber optic lines to be laid.). It was an obvious attack on the illegal use of bittorrent for P2P piracy. Where Comcast went wrong, however, was that not only did they throttle illegal users of Bittorrent, but also the many legitimate uses of the new technology. Now since
Now first lets take a step back and realize that BitTorrent is the name of both a company, and their invention of a safe and increasingly fast p2p traffic. I say “increasingly fast” because it gets faster when more people are downloading(the inverse is true normally). So What if Comcast has a deal with BitTorrent(the company), it doesn’t change the fact that Comcast illegally cut back on their own customers use of Bittorrent traffic. This would be akin to Comcast throttling AIM traffic because it thinks some users are sending copyrighted songs to one another. That, in itself, is discrimination to all AIM users, as is throttling Bittorrent. Thus, the FCC rightfully decided in a 3-2 decision to protect internet neutrality from companies like Comcast to decide what types of traffic it allows you to use.