Battle of Network Neutrality: A State War
There is less than a month left until the cancellation of the US net neutrality rules. On this occasion, disputes in the country have not abated, and the peculiarity of the confrontation lies in the fact that state authorities have joined it.
In previous articles, we traced the history of net neutrality from its inception to its adoption and cancellation in less than 3 years. Today we will look at what has changed since the landmark FCC decision at the end of 2017.
/ Flickr / Backbone Campaign / CC
')
Everything went to the abolition of the rules of network neutrality since 2016. The new president represents the Republican party. Its members over the past years opposed the classification of communication services in force since 2015. Ajit Pai, head of the FCC since January 2017 and openly opposed to the ideas of network neutrality, therefore the rejection of the previous rules and classifications is an expected step of the Commission.
The reaction of supporters of network neutrality could also be foreseen.
A week after the FCC vote, Democratic Senator Ed Markey (Edward Markey), another 25 of his party members and independent individuals promised to legally cancel the Commission’s decision and restore the old rules of net neutrality. Ed Marky announced that he had enough votes to launch the FCC review process. However, for this, a group of senators must receive the signature of the president, who now supports the actions of the Commission.
It also appeared that the association of large technology companies, including Google, Amazon and Twitter, will help organizations that are planning to bring FCC lawsuits. Mozilla has begun decisive action - in January, the developer filed a lawsuit against the FCC decision. After the official publication of the new approach to the activities of the providers, other IT companies filed their claims in March, including Etsy, Kickstarter, Foursquare and Shutterstock. The association, which includes Facebook, Netflix and Uber, filed a motion in the appellate court, demanding to cancel the decision of the FCC.
Even the Burger King intervened in the conflict with a video explaining the effects of net neutrality. Fast food visitors were offered to pay extra for cooking speed or wait for an order indefinitely. So the company illustrated the problem of priority access to sites and services.
Lawmakers in California, New York, Rhode Island, Nebraska, and Massachusetts introduced similar bills. This means that at the federal and regional levels in the United States, various approaches to regulating the telecommunications industry are beginning to take effect. A total of 35 states have attempted to maintain net neutrality.
/ Flickr / Backbone Campaign / CC
The question arises whether individual states have the right to maintain net neutrality. There is a provision in the official FCC document that gives the Commission the “last word” on this issue - it is the highest federal authority that makes decisions about regulating providers in the country. However, lawyers on the side of opponents of the FCC decision argue that the situation is ambiguous.
In judicial practice, there is an example of how the Commission and lost , trying to prove their advantage over the laws of the state, and won in similar cases.
The day after the December vote, the British Independent suggested that “changes in the United States could be a dangerous precedent for other governments who may want to follow this example.” For example, in the European Union there is a single legal framework governing net neutrality. In some European countries, however, local laws have been developed. Among such countries are the Netherlands, which became the first state in Europe and the second in the world after Chile, which passed the law on net neutrality in 2012.
The telecommunications regulator considered this to be a manifestation of discrimination and decided to provide equal access to the Internet for all residents. Now the recommendations of the regulator are considered "one of the most progressive policies in the world to ensure equal access to the Internet for all."
/ Wikimedia / Viggy prabhu / CC
In Russia , net neutrality actually operates . At the beginning of this year, providers asked permission to limit the traffic of individual resources at their discretion. The government claims that they are not going to give up on the principles of net neutrality in runet.
There are a number of countries in which there are no net neutrality rules . So in Guatemala, many people have two SIM cards at once, because one can get free access to WhatsApp, and the other - to Facebook. In Morocco, in 2016, several Internet service providers blocked voice applications, such as Skype and WhatsApp, to force users to pay more for telephone calls.
Under the new rules, providers will be able to promote the offers of their own services and services of paying customers through priority channels, understating the transfer rate of competing resources.
The telecommunications company AT & T has its own streaming service DirecTV Now, while Verizon has its own Go90. With the cancellation of network neutrality, it is likely that access to other applications for subscribers of these providers will be difficult. Blocks of content that does not violate US law, but does not meet the interests of telecommunications companies, are also not excluded. You can learn more about how providers can prioritize their services in the second part of a series of articles.
As for the FCC, the Commission refutes “apocalyptic” scenarios. Chairman Pye believes that the new rules will make the activities of Internet providers more “transparent” and expand consumer choice. Previously, he argued that the Internet did not need additional regulation, and the adoption of net neutrality rules was a “mistake”.
Like it or not, the question is debatable.
The problem of net neutrality in the United States against the background of cancellation and participation in disputes of large companies attracted public attention. Given that most states have taken steps to preserve the canceled rules, the main intrigue is whether they will be able to defend this right and whether the court will not cancel the FCC decision shortly after its entry into force. The history of net neutrality shows that the rules adopted on this issue quickly change to the opposite.
A few more articles from the corporate blog VAS Experts:
Other parts of the story of the battle for net neutrality:
In previous articles, we traced the history of net neutrality from its inception to its adoption and cancellation in less than 3 years. Today we will look at what has changed since the landmark FCC decision at the end of 2017.
/ Flickr / Backbone Campaign / CC
')
“Civil War” for net neutrality
Everything went to the abolition of the rules of network neutrality since 2016. The new president represents the Republican party. Its members over the past years opposed the classification of communication services in force since 2015. Ajit Pai, head of the FCC since January 2017 and openly opposed to the ideas of network neutrality, therefore the rejection of the previous rules and classifications is an expected step of the Commission.
The reaction of supporters of network neutrality could also be foreseen.
A week after the FCC vote, Democratic Senator Ed Markey (Edward Markey), another 25 of his party members and independent individuals promised to legally cancel the Commission’s decision and restore the old rules of net neutrality. Ed Marky announced that he had enough votes to launch the FCC review process. However, for this, a group of senators must receive the signature of the president, who now supports the actions of the Commission.
It also appeared that the association of large technology companies, including Google, Amazon and Twitter, will help organizations that are planning to bring FCC lawsuits. Mozilla has begun decisive action - in January, the developer filed a lawsuit against the FCC decision. After the official publication of the new approach to the activities of the providers, other IT companies filed their claims in March, including Etsy, Kickstarter, Foursquare and Shutterstock. The association, which includes Facebook, Netflix and Uber, filed a motion in the appellate court, demanding to cancel the decision of the FCC.
Even the Burger King intervened in the conflict with a video explaining the effects of net neutrality. Fast food visitors were offered to pay extra for cooking speed or wait for an order indefinitely. So the company illustrated the problem of priority access to sites and services.
In turn, the parties that support the actions of the FCC - mainly providers - also submitted a petition for intervention in the Commission’s policies. They believe her actions were justified.The main feature of the opposition of the FCC at this time was the disagreement with the decision of the Commission of entire states. Attorneys General 21 states in January went to court to challenge the abolition of net neutrality. Montana was the first state to maintain net neutrality rules, despite the decision of the FCC. Washington joined her on March 6th.
Lawmakers in California, New York, Rhode Island, Nebraska, and Massachusetts introduced similar bills. This means that at the federal and regional levels in the United States, various approaches to regulating the telecommunications industry are beginning to take effect. A total of 35 states have attempted to maintain net neutrality.
/ Flickr / Backbone Campaign / CC
The question arises whether individual states have the right to maintain net neutrality. There is a provision in the official FCC document that gives the Commission the “last word” on this issue - it is the highest federal authority that makes decisions about regulating providers in the country. However, lawyers on the side of opponents of the FCC decision argue that the situation is ambiguous.
In judicial practice, there is an example of how the Commission and lost , trying to prove their advantage over the laws of the state, and won in similar cases.
Net neutrality around the world
The day after the December vote, the British Independent suggested that “changes in the United States could be a dangerous precedent for other governments who may want to follow this example.” For example, in the European Union there is a single legal framework governing net neutrality. In some European countries, however, local laws have been developed. Among such countries are the Netherlands, which became the first state in Europe and the second in the world after Chile, which passed the law on net neutrality in 2012.
Here providers are strictly prohibited to charge users for priority access to any services.Its net neutrality rules have been officially in force in India since 2016. They appeared in response to the launch in the country of free, limited Internet from Facebook.
The telecommunications regulator considered this to be a manifestation of discrimination and decided to provide equal access to the Internet for all residents. Now the recommendations of the regulator are considered "one of the most progressive policies in the world to ensure equal access to the Internet for all."
/ Wikimedia / Viggy prabhu / CC
In Russia , net neutrality actually operates . At the beginning of this year, providers asked permission to limit the traffic of individual resources at their discretion. The government claims that they are not going to give up on the principles of net neutrality in runet.
There are a number of countries in which there are no net neutrality rules . So in Guatemala, many people have two SIM cards at once, because one can get free access to WhatsApp, and the other - to Facebook. In Morocco, in 2016, several Internet service providers blocked voice applications, such as Skype and WhatsApp, to force users to pay more for telephone calls.
What does the removal of net neutrality mean?
Under the new rules, providers will be able to promote the offers of their own services and services of paying customers through priority channels, understating the transfer rate of competing resources.
The telecommunications company AT & T has its own streaming service DirecTV Now, while Verizon has its own Go90. With the cancellation of network neutrality, it is likely that access to other applications for subscribers of these providers will be difficult. Blocks of content that does not violate US law, but does not meet the interests of telecommunications companies, are also not excluded. You can learn more about how providers can prioritize their services in the second part of a series of articles.
As for the FCC, the Commission refutes “apocalyptic” scenarios. Chairman Pye believes that the new rules will make the activities of Internet providers more “transparent” and expand consumer choice. Previously, he argued that the Internet did not need additional regulation, and the adoption of net neutrality rules was a “mistake”.
Like it or not, the question is debatable.
The problem of net neutrality in the United States against the background of cancellation and participation in disputes of large companies attracted public attention. Given that most states have taken steps to preserve the canceled rules, the main intrigue is whether they will be able to defend this right and whether the court will not cancel the FCC decision shortly after its entry into force. The history of net neutrality shows that the rules adopted on this issue quickly change to the opposite.
A few more articles from the corporate blog VAS Experts:
- How to organize free Wi-Fi in accordance with the law
- The future of carrier services: what the client needs
- Basic services on the ISP
Other parts of the story of the battle for net neutrality:
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/351366/
All Articles