Battle of network neutrality: judicial wars and public protests
It was the third month since the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC) abandoned the country's approach to regulating providers. This decision is also called a rejection of the principles of net neutrality.
The December decision of the FCC launched numerous debates about the Commission’s policies, as well as attempts to cancel the voting results. Large IT corporations oppose the rejection of network neutrality. It became clear that the abolition of net neutrality will affect other countries that have not yet traveled the United States in this matter. In confirmation of this, Russian providers in January asked about the possibility of independently limiting traffic to specific sites.
Two months are left before the official entry into force of the decision in the United States. After the providers will be able to block traffic or give priority to one or another source at their discretion. In more detail about what network neutrality is and where it came from, we wrote in the first part of this series of articles, and on the first conflicts of the authorities and operators in the second part .
')
In this article we will look at how the approach to net neutrality was in force until December 2017.
/ Flickr / Free Press Action Fund / CC
At the end of 2010, the Commission adopted the basic provisions of net neutrality with the support of the new chairman. They require greater openness from communication providers and oppose the discrimination of traffic and the blocking of legal content. This did not suit the operators for the simple reason that they lost money in the conditions of net neutrality. The logic of providers is as follows: if a subscriber uses a competitor's service, he does not use ours, which means we lose money. According to the new rules, for example, the provider Time Warner Cable could not slow down the connection speed of the subscriber who is trying to gain access to the NBC Universal website owned by competitor Time Warner Cable - Comcast.
The reaction of the operators to the FCC decision was not long in coming - the largest by the number of subscribers in the US Verizon provider a month after the adoption of the new rules went to court. Verizon followed in the footsteps of another operator, Comcast, who challenged the FCC’s right to regulate providers with traffic sources. Recall, a US court ruled in favor of Comcast. But this happened before the adoption of the rules of net neutrality.
Soon, Verizon was joined by a smaller player in the telecommunications market - MetroPCS, the fifth largest US operator by the number of subscribers. Soon after the adoption of the rules of net neutrality, he became the main participant in the new scandal. Provider tariffs, prepared specifically for Samsung Craft phone owners, discriminated against Skype, Netflix, and other popular web services.
One way or another, a federal appeals court ruled that Verizon’s lawsuit was premature because the rules were not yet published in the Federal Registry.
In the summer, the FCC from the Free Press initiative group received a complaint against Google and Verizon. Google allegedly, at the request of the operator, has disabled access to applications for the subscribers of the provider, which allow using devices as mobile access points. This complaint was also declared premature.
In September 2011, the Commission finally published the rules of net neutrality with their planned entry into force in November. From this point on, the opponents of the new order of regulation had the opportunity to challenge them, which, of course, Verizon used - the operator again went to court. In its lawsuit, the company stated that the FCC is trying to impose its own rules, to which the Commission does not have authority, and this creates uncertainty in the market, which ultimately harms innovation. The FCC said it would defend itself in court.
In the autumn of the same year, a movement against online piracy was born in the United States, which in fact contradicted the new rules of net neutrality. In accordance with the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) bill, providers, search engines, and advertisers have become complicit in the crime if the resource with which they are associated broadcasts or sells pirated content. The implication was that the listed parties are obliged to block such traffic on their own at the request of the copyright holder by all available means. SOPA had an ideologically close to it PROTECT IP Act (PIPA). It was mainly aimed at the pirated content of foreign sites and also offered a radical approach to combating copyright infringement.
2011 came to an end, and Verizon’s lawsuit was still pending. The new year began with protest actions against PIPA and SOPA. The largest Internet companies have opposed initiatives that "threatened the free Internet." On January 18, Wikipedia and Reddit turned off access to their English-speaking sections for the whole day in support of the protest. This was a success - the next day the senators refused to consider controversial bills.
Such support for dealing with restrictive laws and its consequences did not stop Verizon. In March, the operator continued to insist in court on its arguments against the new rules of net neutrality. According to the company, the new FCC rules not only unfairly overstate the powers of the Commission, but also violate the constitutional rights of network owners. In particular, representatives of Verizon referred to the First and Fifth Amendment in terms of property management. The rules of network neutrality, according to the provider, contradict the First Amendment of the US Constitution - they restrict the rights of network owners to control content in their networks. Because of this, Verizon cannot prioritize the traffic of its partners and advertisers.
The commission dealt not only with litigation with Verizon. She also investigated the Free Press complaint. In July, the FCC presented a disappointing investigation for the provider - Google really removed 11 applications from its app store for Android devices at the request of Verizon, and this is a direct violation of network neutrality rules. The FCC only regulates Internet service providers, so Google did not respond to this episode. And Verizon was fined $ 1.25 million.
The next "caught by the hand" operator was AT & T. It turned out that the provider is going to restrict iPhone users access to the FaceTime audio and video calling application. According to AT & T plans, it would be possible to make calls through this service only at a certain tariff. The FCC had to investigate, at the request of initiative groups, whether AT & T violated the rules of network neutrality.
Changes in the approach to regulating the Internet occurred not only in the United States. In November 2012, the Netherlands became the second country in the world after Chile , which adopted the rules of net neutrality. A year earlier, the local monopoly provider KPN attempted to combat WhatsApp, Skype and other services that competed with its offerings. Parliament adopted amendments that made it impossible. In response, providers raised prices for their tariffs.
For the United States, 2012, like the previous one, ended in litigation. Verizon and MetroPCS did not retreat from their positions and filed an appeal against the next court decision regarding the rules of network neutrality.
In January 2013, AT & T takes a step back - it partially returns users' access to FaceTime and thus leaves the war with the FCC. In May, the T-Mobile group of companies buys MetroPCS, and the provider also stops its fight with the Commission. Thus, Verizon was the only provider that openly resisted the FCC policy.
In the fall, representatives of the FCC and Verizon met in court . The provider got the opportunity to present their position. A Verizon lawyer again spoke of a violation of the First and Fifth Amendments of the US Constitution, and FCC representatives argued that the rules of network neutrality are designed to "keep the Internet as an open platform." The parties disagreed pending the final decision.
For the Commission, the year ended with the appointment of a new chapter, Tom Wheeler (Tom Wheeler). Tom was called the "cable industry lobbyist" and "FCC rival." Shortly after taking office, he stated that "Internet service providers should be able to charge Netflix and other companies for higher speed for users." So Tom actually confirmed his disagreement with the principles of net neutrality.
2014 began with a new strike for all supporters of network neutrality - the court ruled in favor of Verizon. The court ruled that the Internet can not be classified as an information service. This is a key point in regulating the activities of providers. The classification of a communication channel as a service implies that its owner is not obliged to “share” its infrastructure with competitors.
The court actually gave permission to providers to give priority to this or that traffic, but on the condition that subscribers are notified of this. Although the Commission had the right to appeal the decision, in the spring there was information that the FCC would in fact allow discrimination by providers. Operators will be able to charge companies for preferential terms in their networks.
After a landmark court decision, leading publications with a new force are taken to inform users of its consequences - just a couple of examples: CNN , The New Yorker , Business Insider . Their efforts are not in vain - public protests have gathered at the headquarters of the FCC. The problem of abandoning network neutrality is reaching a new level when it is covered in its program by the host of the popular evening show, John Oliver. This leads viewers to start sending their messages to the FCC in defense of network neutrality and bring down the Commission’s comment reception system.
/ Flickr / Timothy Vollmer / CC
In the fall , protests continue in US cities. Large Internet companies - Twitter, Reddit, Netflix - join ordinary citizens. To demonstrate how the Internet can be without network neutrality, on September 10 thousands of sites spend the first Day of Internet slowdown . On this day, the Kickstarter, Netflix, Etsy, Tumblr, and Reddit pages are specially loaded for a long time, and users can learn more about the problem of network neutrality.
The pressure on the FCC was growing, and in the autumn it peaked when President Obama called for toughening the position of providers and reclassification. The president said that "free and open Internet is just as important to Americans as electricity and telephone services, and should be regulated as well." Tom Wheeler agreed with the position of the president, although the FCC did not openly respond to Obama.
The latest highlight of 2014 from the point of view of the struggle for network neutrality was the unexpected performance of 60 manufacturing equipment manufacturers, including Intel, IBM and Qualcomm, against reclassification of broadband services. They warned that stricter rules for providers would not allow them to invest in broadband development. Thus, the opposition of net neutrality has been replenished with new supporters. However, among the enthusiasts of this concept was still the president of the United States.
In the next article, we will look at how the Commission came to abandon net neutrality over the course of three years, and what this solution may lead to.
PS Previous posts in the Battle of Network Neutrality series:
PPS A few more articles from the corporate blog VAS Experts:
The December decision of the FCC launched numerous debates about the Commission’s policies, as well as attempts to cancel the voting results. Large IT corporations oppose the rejection of network neutrality. It became clear that the abolition of net neutrality will affect other countries that have not yet traveled the United States in this matter. In confirmation of this, Russian providers in January asked about the possibility of independently limiting traffic to specific sites.
Two months are left before the official entry into force of the decision in the United States. After the providers will be able to block traffic or give priority to one or another source at their discretion. In more detail about what network neutrality is and where it came from, we wrote in the first part of this series of articles, and on the first conflicts of the authorities and operators in the second part .
')
In this article we will look at how the approach to net neutrality was in force until December 2017.
/ Flickr / Free Press Action Fund / CC
Listening to the case: FCC against the largest providers
At the end of 2010, the Commission adopted the basic provisions of net neutrality with the support of the new chairman. They require greater openness from communication providers and oppose the discrimination of traffic and the blocking of legal content. This did not suit the operators for the simple reason that they lost money in the conditions of net neutrality. The logic of providers is as follows: if a subscriber uses a competitor's service, he does not use ours, which means we lose money. According to the new rules, for example, the provider Time Warner Cable could not slow down the connection speed of the subscriber who is trying to gain access to the NBC Universal website owned by competitor Time Warner Cable - Comcast.
The reaction of the operators to the FCC decision was not long in coming - the largest by the number of subscribers in the US Verizon provider a month after the adoption of the new rules went to court. Verizon followed in the footsteps of another operator, Comcast, who challenged the FCC’s right to regulate providers with traffic sources. Recall, a US court ruled in favor of Comcast. But this happened before the adoption of the rules of net neutrality.
Soon, Verizon was joined by a smaller player in the telecommunications market - MetroPCS, the fifth largest US operator by the number of subscribers. Soon after the adoption of the rules of net neutrality, he became the main participant in the new scandal. Provider tariffs, prepared specifically for Samsung Craft phone owners, discriminated against Skype, Netflix, and other popular web services.
One way or another, a federal appeals court ruled that Verizon’s lawsuit was premature because the rules were not yet published in the Federal Registry.
In the summer, the FCC from the Free Press initiative group received a complaint against Google and Verizon. Google allegedly, at the request of the operator, has disabled access to applications for the subscribers of the provider, which allow using devices as mobile access points. This complaint was also declared premature.
In September 2011, the Commission finally published the rules of net neutrality with their planned entry into force in November. From this point on, the opponents of the new order of regulation had the opportunity to challenge them, which, of course, Verizon used - the operator again went to court. In its lawsuit, the company stated that the FCC is trying to impose its own rules, to which the Commission does not have authority, and this creates uncertainty in the market, which ultimately harms innovation. The FCC said it would defend itself in court.
In the autumn of the same year, a movement against online piracy was born in the United States, which in fact contradicted the new rules of net neutrality. In accordance with the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) bill, providers, search engines, and advertisers have become complicit in the crime if the resource with which they are associated broadcasts or sells pirated content. The implication was that the listed parties are obliged to block such traffic on their own at the request of the copyright holder by all available means. SOPA had an ideologically close to it PROTECT IP Act (PIPA). It was mainly aimed at the pirated content of foreign sites and also offered a radical approach to combating copyright infringement.
2011 came to an end, and Verizon’s lawsuit was still pending. The new year began with protest actions against PIPA and SOPA. The largest Internet companies have opposed initiatives that "threatened the free Internet." On January 18, Wikipedia and Reddit turned off access to their English-speaking sections for the whole day in support of the protest. This was a success - the next day the senators refused to consider controversial bills.
Such support for dealing with restrictive laws and its consequences did not stop Verizon. In March, the operator continued to insist in court on its arguments against the new rules of net neutrality. According to the company, the new FCC rules not only unfairly overstate the powers of the Commission, but also violate the constitutional rights of network owners. In particular, representatives of Verizon referred to the First and Fifth Amendment in terms of property management. The rules of network neutrality, according to the provider, contradict the First Amendment of the US Constitution - they restrict the rights of network owners to control content in their networks. Because of this, Verizon cannot prioritize the traffic of its partners and advertisers.
The commission dealt not only with litigation with Verizon. She also investigated the Free Press complaint. In July, the FCC presented a disappointing investigation for the provider - Google really removed 11 applications from its app store for Android devices at the request of Verizon, and this is a direct violation of network neutrality rules. The FCC only regulates Internet service providers, so Google did not respond to this episode. And Verizon was fined $ 1.25 million.
The next "caught by the hand" operator was AT & T. It turned out that the provider is going to restrict iPhone users access to the FaceTime audio and video calling application. According to AT & T plans, it would be possible to make calls through this service only at a certain tariff. The FCC had to investigate, at the request of initiative groups, whether AT & T violated the rules of network neutrality.
Changes in the approach to regulating the Internet occurred not only in the United States. In November 2012, the Netherlands became the second country in the world after Chile , which adopted the rules of net neutrality. A year earlier, the local monopoly provider KPN attempted to combat WhatsApp, Skype and other services that competed with its offerings. Parliament adopted amendments that made it impossible. In response, providers raised prices for their tariffs.
For the United States, 2012, like the previous one, ended in litigation. Verizon and MetroPCS did not retreat from their positions and filed an appeal against the next court decision regarding the rules of network neutrality.
In January 2013, AT & T takes a step back - it partially returns users' access to FaceTime and thus leaves the war with the FCC. In May, the T-Mobile group of companies buys MetroPCS, and the provider also stops its fight with the Commission. Thus, Verizon was the only provider that openly resisted the FCC policy.
In the fall, representatives of the FCC and Verizon met in court . The provider got the opportunity to present their position. A Verizon lawyer again spoke of a violation of the First and Fifth Amendments of the US Constitution, and FCC representatives argued that the rules of network neutrality are designed to "keep the Internet as an open platform." The parties disagreed pending the final decision.
For the Commission, the year ended with the appointment of a new chapter, Tom Wheeler (Tom Wheeler). Tom was called the "cable industry lobbyist" and "FCC rival." Shortly after taking office, he stated that "Internet service providers should be able to charge Netflix and other companies for higher speed for users." So Tom actually confirmed his disagreement with the principles of net neutrality.
Net neutrality goes to the masses
2014 began with a new strike for all supporters of network neutrality - the court ruled in favor of Verizon. The court ruled that the Internet can not be classified as an information service. This is a key point in regulating the activities of providers. The classification of a communication channel as a service implies that its owner is not obliged to “share” its infrastructure with competitors.
The court actually gave permission to providers to give priority to this or that traffic, but on the condition that subscribers are notified of this. Although the Commission had the right to appeal the decision, in the spring there was information that the FCC would in fact allow discrimination by providers. Operators will be able to charge companies for preferential terms in their networks.
After a landmark court decision, leading publications with a new force are taken to inform users of its consequences - just a couple of examples: CNN , The New Yorker , Business Insider . Their efforts are not in vain - public protests have gathered at the headquarters of the FCC. The problem of abandoning network neutrality is reaching a new level when it is covered in its program by the host of the popular evening show, John Oliver. This leads viewers to start sending their messages to the FCC in defense of network neutrality and bring down the Commission’s comment reception system.
/ Flickr / Timothy Vollmer / CC
In the fall , protests continue in US cities. Large Internet companies - Twitter, Reddit, Netflix - join ordinary citizens. To demonstrate how the Internet can be without network neutrality, on September 10 thousands of sites spend the first Day of Internet slowdown . On this day, the Kickstarter, Netflix, Etsy, Tumblr, and Reddit pages are specially loaded for a long time, and users can learn more about the problem of network neutrality.
The pressure on the FCC was growing, and in the autumn it peaked when President Obama called for toughening the position of providers and reclassification. The president said that "free and open Internet is just as important to Americans as electricity and telephone services, and should be regulated as well." Tom Wheeler agreed with the position of the president, although the FCC did not openly respond to Obama.
The latest highlight of 2014 from the point of view of the struggle for network neutrality was the unexpected performance of 60 manufacturing equipment manufacturers, including Intel, IBM and Qualcomm, against reclassification of broadband services. They warned that stricter rules for providers would not allow them to invest in broadband development. Thus, the opposition of net neutrality has been replenished with new supporters. However, among the enthusiasts of this concept was still the president of the United States.
In the next article, we will look at how the Commission came to abandon net neutrality over the course of three years, and what this solution may lead to.
PS Previous posts in the Battle of Network Neutrality series:
- Battle of network neutrality: background
- The battle for network neutrality: wars with operators and first courts
PPS A few more articles from the corporate blog VAS Experts:
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/347050/
All Articles