Neutrality Bill Won’t Harm Piracy Fight, Markey Says
Passage of a net-neutrality bill won’t interfere with the war on Internet content piracy, House Telecom Subcommittee Chairman Ed Markey, D-Mass., said Tuesday at a hearing on his bill (HR-5353). But the bill, cast as a bipartisan compromise, didn’t win strong support. Disputes continue between backers of government rules and free-market advocates.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
“On copyright protection, we all agree,” Markey said. “We want content to be protected.” But the effort must not hurt competition, he said: “We don’t want it [content] to get managed out of existence.”
Providers say they need to be able to manage their networks to combat congestion and address distribution of bootleg content. Many fear legislation mandating an open Internet could compromise those roles, they say. Markey’s bill, co-sponsored by retiring Rep. Chip Pickering, R-Miss., says the U.S. needs open networks for “lawful purposes,” so sites offering pirated content wouldn’t be protected.
“It’s not irrelevant that the vast majority of peer-to- peer traffic is pirated content,” said NCTA President Kyle McSlarrow. Network-management practices go unnoticed most of the time, he said, terming a widely cited example of Comcast’s blocking of P2P transfers a “complex” situation. “We still have a problem of peak congestion,” he said. “That problem is the most challenging,” but engineers are experimenting with solutions, he said.
Concern with network management is that carriers could “target” particular applications, said Free Press Policy Director Ben Scott, speaking for Consumer Federation of America, Consumer Union and Public Knowledge. “Comcast is a bellwether case,” he said. “They were for net-neutrality principles before they had to enforce them.”
McSlarrow endorsed the bill’s call for the FCC to study network operators’ practices in content management, but opposed a section that would codify the FCC Internet principles, he said. It’s the wrong time to “change course in a regulatory direction,” he said.
Congress should authorize the FCC to enforce its Internet principles, Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein told a Tuesday Computer and Communications Industry Association Caucus event. “We need to make sure the Internet stays open,” he said. Some providers may “scoff” at the commission’s authority regarding the principles now, he added.
Pickering said the bill offers a “reasonable middle ground, and from the GOP point of view, it is the best place to stand.” Congress should make clear that the FCC has authority to enforce its Internet principles, he said, urging case by case handling of discriminatory conduct.
Several members voiced fear that a network management law could slow broadband’s spread. “This… does not help rural America get to an equal place” with broadband, said Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill. Texas Democrat Gene Green fears a law could be “too broad” and discourage investment, he said.
“We must ensure that any action to ensure a robust and open Internet architecture also furthers other important policy goals such as broadband deployment,” said House Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell, D-Mich. “This bill takes us down a dangerous path. Carriers need the flexibility to experiment with different business models, as well as to manage network congestion and quality of service in the short term while they invest and innovate for the long term,” said Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich. -- Anne Veigle
*****
FCC review of broadband network management drew more 26,000 comments, said Free Press, which wants the agency to adopt rules on such practices (WID May 6 p6). But 26,457 of those comments inadvertently landed in the wrong docket, the group told FCC Secretary Marlene Dortch. “Free Press would like to apologize for the inconvenience.” Free Press re- filed the comments April 25 to the correct docket, 07-52, organizing them into one batch per state.