• Background: Neutral treatment by providers
• Debate: Equal access v. overtaxed networks
• Country Comparison: European Union
• Recent Legislation: In progress

Background: Neutral treatment by providers

• The manner in which telecommunications networks operate and provide access by others to their telephone networks has long been subject to significant regulation. However, there has been little regulation governing access to the broadband networks that form key components of the Internet.

• The transmission of data over broadband networks has grown significantly and continues to grow. As the number of sites on the Internet proliferates, as more sophisticated services are offered over the Internet, and as more voice, audio and multimedia files are transmitted by Internet, demand for the network often outpaces network capacity, resulting in degradation of service.

• Network operators employ various technologies and techniques to manage the flow of traffic over the network. Some network operators have proposed offering different tiers of network access to content and service providers based on the payment of fees.

• To date, the manner in which the network operators manage the flow of data through their networks has been largely free from governmental regulation.

• Net neutrality refers to the notion that legislation should be enacted to regulate the manner in which networks manage the flow of data, content and services across their network to ensure that operators provide equal access to everyone, without discrimination and without charging different levels of fees to content or service providers for faster or more reliable transmission of data.

Debate: Equal access v. overtaxed networks

• Proponents of net neutrality legislation argue that in the absence of regulation, telecommunications companies who operate the broadband networks that power the Internet may discriminate among the content or service providers who use their networks. They argue that the network providers could provide favorable network access to their own content or services or to content and service providers who pay a fee for superior service, and that the content and services of competitors and those who are unwilling or unable to pay a fee will be relegated to slower network channels, making user access to these sites and services slow or even impossible.
• Proponents seek regulations preventing network providers from discriminating amongst content or service providers and from providing superior access to the network for their own content or services or for those who pay a higher fee.
• Network providers argue that data-intensive content and service-providers use up disproportionate shares of network bandwidth without contributing their fair share of the network provider’s costs of making the broadband network available. They argue that limiting their ability to charge appropriate fees for different tiers of service will stymie investment, resulting in a degradation of the overall speed and reliability of the network.
• Leading internet companies like Google, Amazon, eBay and Interactive Corp have come out strong in favor or net neutrality legislation. Google claims that the principle of net neutrality has allowed many companies like itself to launch, grow, and innovate.
• In addition to telecommunications and cable companies who own many of the networks at issue, some prominent engineers such as Bob Kahn and David Farber oppose legislation regulating network access.

Country Comparison

• The net neutrality debate in the European Union is apart of the wider issue of regulating telecoms services. In 2002, the European Union adopted a new regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services with the goal of increasing competition and forcing incumbent providers to raise standards of service and reduce prices. This regulation seeks to protect consumers while fostering innovation through competitive telecoms markets. Although it has not been a topic of extensive debate on its own, European regulators have expressed support for net neutrality (FT Times, EUCAP) while emphasizing the rights of both consumers and operators. (Source: European Commission).

Recent Legislation

• The Advanced Telecommunications and Opportunities Reform Act of 2006 (H.R.5252) passed 08 June 2006 in the House but did not make it through the Senate. The act would make numerous changes to provisions of current law that regulate telecommunications. Its main purpose would be to change how local governments may issue franchises to providers of video services. Net-neutrality issues are embedded within the bill and opponents claim those provisions would compromise the integrity of the internet and would deny consumers unfettered access (Source: The Washington Post).

MapLight.org provides a timeline of financial contributions from supporters and opponents of this bill and a breakdown of the voting record and interest group donations during the month of of the vote. Supporters of the bill (namely Verizon, AT&T, and Bellsouth) gave $15,220 on average to each congressman that voted in favor of the legislation and an average of $5,700 to each congressman who voted against it (Source: maplight.org).

• In June 2006, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation passed its own telecoms bill that, among other things, protects net neutrality (Source: Senate Committee on CST)

• Senators Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) introduced the Internet Freedom Preservation Act in Jan 2007. It would amend the Communications Act of 1934 to restore net neutrality protections. The bill appears to have been abandoned (Source: GovTrack.us).