FCC releases all 400 pages of its new net neutrality rules

The FCC on Thursday released the full text of the Open Internet Order, which imposes net neutrality rules on broadband Internet providers.

Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP/File
FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler bangs the gavel at the conclusion of an FCC open hearing on February 26, 2015. At the hearing the FCC voted to approve the Open Internet Order, the full text of which was released on Thursday.

In the days leading up to the Federal Communications Commission’s "net neutrality" vote earlier this month, Commissioner Ajit Pai frequently criticized the Commission for not releasing the full text of the Order being voted on. (In point of fact, both Democratic and Republican FCC commissioners have historically insisted on having a three-week window to deliberate before holding a vote.)

On February 25, Commissioner Pai tweeted a picture of himself holding the plan, adding, “The public still can’t see it.”

As of Thursday, the public can now see the order – all 400 pages of it.

This is the set of rules that reclassifies the Internet as a public utility and broadband Internet providers as “common carriers” under Title II of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. By classifying providers in this way, the FCC gives itself more power to mandate that providers treat all traffic flowing across their networks more or less equally. Providers may not prioritize certain services or applications over others, nor may they create “fast lanes” for those companies willing to pay to have their content delivered to consumers faster. This evenhanded treatment of Internet traffic is what’s meant by the term “net neutrality.”

What’s most surprising about the bill is the extent to which the FCC won’t regulate providers. Title II allows it to take measures such as setting retail rates and even mandating that providers lease (or “unbundle”) portions of their networks to competitors. But the FCC says it won’t be doing any of that. More than 700 of the Title II rules won’t be applied to broadband Internet providers. That means those providers are exempt from tariffing and cost-accounting rules, in addition to rate regulation and mandatory unbundling.

The order also does not make specific rules about interconnect points – the places at which the networks of content providers meet those of broadband providers, such as Comcast and Verizon. Last year, Netflix paid large sums to both of those companies to be able to hook directly into their networks, bypassing the Internet backbone and avoiding congestion. The order doesn’t cover those sorts of arrangements; it only says that the FCC can hear interconnection complaints on a case-by-case basis.

The order does allow broadband providers to prioritize traffic in the interest of “reasonable network management,” but it imposed strict rules concerning what is and is not “reasonable.” Throttling an application that is slowing down network access for everyone during peak hours might be considered reasonable. Degrading connection speeds to induce customers to upgrade to higher-tier connection plans would not be.

AT&T criticized the order on the grounds that it could disincentivize companies from improving Internet access for their customers. “Unfortunately, the order released today begins a period of uncertainty that will damage broadband investment in the United States,” AT&T executive Jim Cicconi wrote in a statement. “Ultimately, though, we are confident the issue will be resolved by bipartisan action by Congress or a future FCC, or by the courts.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.