Image via CrunchBaseEditorial - The Google/Verizon Payment Plan - NYTimes.comFor months, the Federal Communications Commission’s efforts to guarantee nondiscriminatory access to broadband Internet have met opposition from the companies that provide broadband service and from their allies in Congress. On Monday, Verizon and Google created a stir by jointly proposing an alternative set of rules as the basis for new legislation governing the Internet.
Every voice is valuable in this debate, and some of the ideas put forth by Google and Verizon are reasonable in principle. But the overall effect would dangerously limit the commission’s reach. That’s not where Congress should be headed. The F.C.C. should have an expanded role in regulating what is rapidly becoming the most important channel of communication in the world.
The Google/Verizon proposal gives broadband providers lots of leeway to offer preferential treatment to some and to choke off others. Most important, the two companies propose to exempt wireless communication from most government regulation — a serious error.
We strongly agreed with the principle articulated by President Obama and his F.C.C. chairman, Julius Genachowski, that the Internet should remain open on equal terms to all, a level playing field for Web sites big and small. Phone and cable companies claim that overregulation of broadband will stifle investment. They say the principle of “net neutrality” must be tempered by provisions to allow service providers to manage traffic on their pipes. This is not unreasonable in principle, if narrowly tailored to the problem. But the Verizon-Google proposal gives companies too much wiggle room.
They would allow broadband service providers to split the Internet into a high-end pipe for new types of zippier paid services and a lower-speed pipe carrying regular broadband. And they propose to bar only “undue” discrimination that causes “meaningful harm to competition or to users” of broadband. Providers would be allowed to manage their networks to address congestion, “ensure network security or integrity,” to “prioritize general classes or types of Internet traffic,” to “ensure service quality” and more.
The companies propose freeing wireless broadband — the fastest growing part of the Internet — from any antidiscrimination restrictions. Verizon, which markets phones running Google’s Android operating system, might, for instance, find it lucrative to one day block Microsoft’s search engine, Bing.
This is not an adequate framework to guide Internet policy, especially in a market as concentrated as the United States, where Verizon and AT&T control about 60 percent of wireless subscribers and 80 percent of Americans live in areas with only two wireline broadband providers. Consumers will lose if wireless goes unregulated.
