BELLS, CABLE SHARE CONCERNS ON NET NEUTRALITY

摘要

Cable interests and the Bells, usually at odds in Washington, have found common ground in the net neutrality debate: Govt. shouldn't mandate a solution where both say there isn抰 a problem. The National Cable & Telecommunications Assn. paid for a study by Vanderbilt U. Law Prof. Christopher Yoo to make that point for today抯 (Tues.) hearing before the Senate Commerce Committee. 揘etwork neutrality [regulation] is premature. It抯 moving into a space where even the FCC is publicly saying, 慦e抮e not seeing big problems,挃 Yoo said. He suggested network neutrality rules could have the 損erverse?effect of reducing competition in last mile transmission to peoples' homes. 揟he obvious solution would be to allow networks to give a higher priority to traffic with time-sensitive applications,?Yoo said. While some would suggest this could lead to discrimination, Yoo argued the alternative: Requiring everyone to communicate using the same protocol would drastically limit how networks could compete. It also would force networks to compete solely on the basis of price and size, which would favor the largest players.nnPublic Knowledge Pres. Gigi Sohn disagreed, arguing that without regulatory guidance, network providers will 損ick and choose content providers?and consumers will be the losers. Public Knowledge released a study Mon. by former ALTS Pres. John Windhausen that calls for a network neutrality rule in federal law. The study recommends 3 provisions: (1) Network operators should be obligated to carry all traffic without discrimination, to permit any use and provision of applications and allow use of any equipment. (2) Operators should have a right to prevent harm to their networks and engage in legitimate network management and must comply with laws regarding access to unlawful content. (3) A complaint process, to be handled by the FCC, should put the burden of proof on network operators to prove no blocking or discriminatory actions have occurred.