{"id":12121,"date":"2014-03-21T20:03:00","date_gmt":"2014-03-22T00:03:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.publicknowledge.org\/uncategorized\/here-is-how-to-get-open-internet-rules-right\/"},"modified":"2024-06-17T16:10:14","modified_gmt":"2024-06-17T16:10:14","slug":"here-is-how-to-get-open-internet-rules-right","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/publicknowledge.org\/here-is-how-to-get-open-internet-rules-right\/","title":{"rendered":"Here is How to Get Open Internet Rules Right"},"content":{"rendered":"

Today Public Knowledge, joined by our allies at Common Cause<\/a>, submitted comments<\/a> in the FCC\u2019s Open Internet proceeding.\u00a0 In the comments we made clear that the Commission must move quickly to establish strong, enforceable open internet rules that can withstand the inevitable court challenge.<\/p>\n

Today\u2019s comments<\/a> flow from the DC Circuit\u2019s decision in January to overturn the Open Internet rules<\/a> that the FCC put in place in 2010.\u00a0 In the wake of this decision, the FCC put out a Public Notice<\/a> essentially asking the public what they should do.\u00a0 These comments are our answer.\u00a0 I urge you to take a look at them in their entirety, but just in case you are in a rush on this Friday afternoon, here are some of the high-level points.<\/p>\n

The Open Internet is Important<\/strong>.\u00a0 This may feel somewhat obvious, but it is worth repeating.\u00a0 An open internet is key to a vibrant cultural, economic, and civic life, and the FCC has an obligation to protect it. That means that it needs to move quickly to put new rules in place.\u00a0 Beyond that, those rules need to be strong enough to actually protect an open internet (no “open internet lite” masquerading as real open internet rules) and grounded in legal authority that will withstand the court challenge that will come not matter what the FCC does.<\/p>\n

Title II is the Best Way to Protect an Open Internet<\/strong>.\u00a0 Speaking of withstanding a court challenge, the best thing that the Commission can do to make sure that the rules survive is to ground them in strong statutory authority.\u00a0 That means looking to Title II.\u00a0 Many of the problems in the internet access market (abuse by termination monopolists, interconnection disputes, information asymmetry, cost of network exclusion) were solved long ago in the Title II context, and those solutions could provide quite helpful going forward.\u00a0 However, if the FCC decides to test its luck with Section 706 instead \u2013 a decision that would be ill-considered \u2013 we show it how it has some flexibility to define key terms in a way that minimize any conflict between real open internet rules and prohibitions established by the DC Circuit.<\/p>\n

Open Internet is Broader Than Net Neutrality<\/strong>.\u00a0 The FCC has long described this docket as the \u201copen internet\u201d proceeding, not the \u201cnet neutrality\u201d proceeding.\u00a0 Public Knowledge is ready to accept that these terms are different, and believes that an open internet encompasses more than just net neutrality.\u00a0 That means that debates as to whether or not interconnection and peering fit within the traditional definition of net neutrality should not really matter for this proceeding.\u00a0 Disputes that threaten an open internet should be considered within the context of this rule.\u00a0 For issues like data caps and interconnection with the potential to threaten the open internet, the FCC\u2019s first step needs to be to start collecting data and asking questions.\u00a0 Without information, it will be impossible for the FCC to determine if these types of issues are truly treats to an open internet.<\/p>\n

Phone Principles Can Help Guide Internet Access Principles<\/strong>.\u00a0 Most major stakeholders have come together to agree that the phone network transition should be guided by a set of fundamental principles.\u00a0 Public Knowledge has described them<\/a> as<\/p>\n