Add to del.icio.us     Digg this

January 11, 2007

As many political observers had expected, Maine Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe and North Dakota Democrat Sen. Byron Dorgan teamed up one more time in trying to introduce an identical version of their older bill, known as the IFPA (Internet Freedom Preservation Act) which died in the Senate in 2006.

The Internet Freedom Preservation Act's reintroduction "marks another step toward ensuring the fate of the Internet lies in the hands of its users and not in the hands of a few gatekeepers," Snowe said in a written statement.

Overall, Net neutrality is the idea that network operators such as AT&T and Verizon should be prohibited from prioritizing any content or services that travel across their networks.

As a practical example of what lawmakers are trying to prevent would be charging YouTube extra fees for the privilege of being delivered faster than, say, Revver.com.

In the past, the once low-profile issue catapulted to the public sphere after telecommunications executives began warning more than a year ago that they should have the right to charge extra for premium placement on their network to recoup vast investments in their infrastructure.

That drove Internet companies, consumer groups and a number of high-profile backers, ranging from actress Alyssa Milano to Vinton Cerf, one of the Internet's technical pioneers, to mount grassroots campaigns calling for federal regulations barring such a practice.

Overall, they contend that any prioritization threatens the freedoms that Net users have always enjoyed. Opponents of such regulations have argued that there's no evidence of a discrimination problem and that new rules would stifle innovation.

The Snowe-Dorgan bill would in fact prevent network operators from blocking or degrading access to Internet content and services, and from preventing consumers from connecting external devices to the network, with exceptions for security and other consumer protection purposes.

The new measure would enable prioritization of content, and allow applications or services only if it is done for all types of that particular content, application or service, and, without a fee. That would likely mean, for instance, that Verizon could choose to set aside a dedicated network for all user-generated video content, but it would have to make that network available to all user-generated video sites, and for free.

The new legislation also deals with outside Net neutrality and proposes that all broadband companies must offer customers the option of purchasing standalone broadband service. It would then be up to the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) to enforce any complaints derived from the bill's obligations.

The Senate action comes at a time of an important FCC decision to accept Net neutrality conditions offered by AT&T on its merger with BellSouth. AT&T has maintained that it offered the concessions primarily to break partisan deadlock over the deal's approval, and further continues to resist the idea of legislation mandating Net neutrality.

In sharp contrast to their Democratic colleagues on the FCC, the two voting Republicans, Chairman Kevin Martin and Commissioner Deborah T. Tate, also said they had no intention of applying Net neutrality conditions more broadly.

The U.S. telephone industry, including AT&T and Verizon representatives, was quick to criticize the Snowe-Dorgan bill's re-emergence. "Government regulation would make it against the law for any company to invest in customized Internet service," said Walter McCormick, president of the U.S. Telecom Association, which lobbies for more than 1,200 communications firms. "In essence, that would mean all of us losing advances in home health monitoring, greater security of our financial transactions, new entertainment choices and telecommuting opportunities."

In turn, consumer advocacy groups welcomed the renewed effort, which was co-sponsored by six Democrats: Sens. Barbara Boxer, John Kerry, Tom Harkin, Patrick Leahy, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. There were no Republicans aside from Snowe.

"The newly proposed bill is the first step towards a national policy that will ensure that all users, not just the most affluent, have affordable access to high-speed Internet services," said Jeannine Kenney, a senior policy analyst with Consumers Union.

When the two senators introduced the same language as an amendment to a massive communications bill in 2006, it largely failed by an 11-11 vote that was mostly along party lines, with the Democrats voting in favor.

In 2007, and with the majority tipped slightly to the Democratic side, the new legislation's chances could improve somewhat, but aren't assured any victory.

In the Senate, sixty votes are required to prevent the filibusters that often stall contentious bills.

In the House of Representatives, Rep. Edward Markey is expected to reintroduce his own Net neutrality proposal, which seeks similar requirements to the Senate version but was defeated by the Republican-controlled chamber in 2006.

An aide to the Massachusetts Democrat, who was formally named chairman of a House Internet and telecommunications subcommittee on Jan. 9, said it wasn't immediately clear when that action would occur.

Add to del.icio.us     Digg this

Source: C-Net News