The Federal Communications Commission voted 3-2 June 17 to solicit feedback on ways to regulate broadband access. The key proposal includes FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski's plan to define broadband access as a telecommunications service subject to "common carrier" obligations, which calls for all data traffic to be equally treated. Approved by Web services providers such as Google and Amazon.com, this "light touch" aims to strike middle ground by rejecting the enforcement of legacy phone regulation to broadband, as well as the elimination of broadband oversight by the FCC.
The Federal Communications Commission voted 3-2 June 17 to court feedback on
ways to regulate broadband access, with Democrats winning out over the
Republicans in a classic partisan matchup over the future of the Web.
The key proposal includes FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski's plan to define
broadband access as a telecommunications service subject to "common
carrier" obligations, which calls for all data traffic to be equally
treated.
This "light touch"
aims to strike middle ground by rejecting the enforcement of
legacy phone regulation to broadband, as well as the elimination of broadband
oversight by the FCC.
This so-called "
third way" is a
network neutrality approach lauded by companies such as
Google and Amazon.com.
These Internet companies believe that Internet service providers such as
Verizon, Comcast AT&T should not be allowed to throttle the Web services
and applications they offer to consumers.
AT&T and the other carriers vehemently oppose such regulation,
suggesting such a move would hinder innovation and investment.
Republican Commissioner Meredith A. Baker sided with the carriers when she
offered her dissenting vote because:
"opening a proceeding creates so much regulatory uncertainty that it
harms incentives for investment in broadband infrastructure and makes providers
and investors alike think twice about moving forward with network investments
under this dark regulatory cloud. This outcome can only harm consumers who need
better, faster and more ubiquitous broadband today."
Genachowski disagreed.
"It's not hard to understand why companies subject to an agency's
oversight would prefer no oversight at all if they had the chance," he
said. "But a system of checks and balances in the communications sector
has served our country well for many decades, fostering trillions of dollars of
investment in wired and wireless communications networks, and in content,
applications and services-and creating countless jobs and consumer
benefits."
Email
Print
