Net neutrality (News - Alert), which has been on the back burner in recent months, is about to get some heat again. Several pending actions in the Federal Communications Commission (FCC (News - Alert)) and congress, such “Internet Freedom Law” introduced Wednesday by Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) have the potential to bring the issue from the simmer to the boil.

 

Besides the Markey measure, the FCC is organizing a public hearing on the issue of bandwidth throttling as part of the agency’s consideration of a petition again Comcast Communications, Inc. for cutting off access to BitTorrent when the network is crowded. And Verizon (News - Alert) is under fire for denying mobile phone short codes to several organizations, one of which offers a competitive telephone service.

 

The new Markey bill “is quite a bit different from what has been introduced in past (by Markey),” says Art Brodsky, communications director, Public Knowledge, a public-interest lobbying group. “In the past legislation has been very prescriptive and detailed.”

 

Rather than detailing specific regulations, the new Markey bill calls on the FCC to conduct a “thorough inquiry” to determine “broadband policies that will promote openness, competition, innovation, and affordable, ubiquitous broadband service for all.”

 

Part of the commission’s task is to conduct an “Internet freedom assessment” to determine whether or not service providers are adhering to “the Commission’s Broadband Policy Statement of August, 2005,” which prohibits actions that might interfere with users’ ability to access or use lawful content and services over the Internet and to attach any legal device that does not harm the network.

 

The bill also directs the FCC to conduct at least eight “public broadband summits” throughout the country, as well as soliciting public comment using the Internet. In the end, the FCC would have to issue a report to congress summarizing its findings.

 

Brodsky finds it significant that the new Markey bill “takes the concept of nondiscrimination, which was applied to telephone service for 70 years ago under the (1934) Telecom Act and ports it over to Title I” (the part of the 1934 act that deals with so-called “data” services, which includes cable modem and DSL. The FCC has ruled that information services, such as consumer broadband, are under Title 1.

 

It is too early to tell how the various factions in the net-neutrality debate — cable and telco monopolies, the competitive carriers, VoIP service providers, IXCs and wholesalers — will react to the proposal, but in the past incumbents have tended to oppose net neutrality measures. “The presumption is that the Markey bill, which is different from what he introduced previously, has a greater chance of passing this year,” says Kohlenberger.

 

The second issue coming to the forefront this week is throttling bandwidth. The FCC has announced a public meeting at Harvard University, February 26 to explore how some service providers, specifically Comcast, have controlled bandwidth and ended sessions. According to Brodsky, Comcast has been observed to close down traffic from BitTorrent, a site for sharing video.

 

Some public-interest groups, including Public Knowledge, have objected to the way Comcast closed the BitTorrent sessions. Brodsky says the cable operator is shutting down the sessions by forging a request to end the session by the user.

 

“The interesting thing is the BitTorrent case,” says Jim Kohlenberger (News - Alert), executive director, The VON Coalition. Comcast claims that its terms of service allow it to manage peer-to-peer traffic and even limit the number of peer-to-peer connections. “The FCC has defined VoIP as peer-to-peer traffic, Kohlenberger says, making it possible for a service provider to make a case for limiting VoIP as peer-to-peer traffic. “That is one of questions that enters into this Comcast issue.”

 

Verizon also may be on the hot seat for, reportedly, denying the use of short codes on its mobile network to various organizations. One group, NARAL, a pro-choice organization, says it was told that it is too controversial. The group succeeded in getting a front-page article in The New York Times, after which, Brodsky says, Verizon relented. Also, he adds, Rebtel (News - Alert) Inc., a provider of competitive phone services, was denied short codes.

 

In addition to the Markey bill and the hearing at Harvard, this week also marks the end of the comment period for an FCC action about Comcast’s throttling of BitTorrent, asking whether it is reasonable network management.

 

The perfect storm of this week’s events puts net neutrality back in the public eye, and may spark the broad public debate that many in the VoIP community feel is important to protect the industry’s ability to compete.

 

 

Comcast Communications Inc.

Federal Communications Commission

Public Knowledge

Rebtel

Verizon Communications Inc.