The Federal Communications Commission officially voted to restore net neutrality on Thursday, adopting an order titled “Protecting and Securing the Open Internet.” This restores, with some modifications and protections, the rules adopted in 2015 that allow the FCC to enforce core broadband connectivity and fairness rules.
Since the FCC announced in September that it was pursuing this as a policy goal, this was more or less a fait accompli since there was no real reason why the Commission, split 3-2 in favor of Democrats, would vote against it. Thursday, while important, is just another milestone on the path forward.
The usual old criticisms have been eliminated, as they were 10 years ago: strict regulation, tariff control, suppression of innovation – general arguments that never really carried much weight. As Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel points out, the FCC is already implementing rules in other areas with this authority (like Title II, for those of you who have been with us since the beginning), and these will not be overcome by draconian rules and restrictions.
Instead, it points to pointless inconsistencies with the last few years of operation. For example, last year the FCC revoked the ability of some wireless carriers affiliated with Chinese state actors to operate in the United States
“But it is important to understand that, thanks to the work of the last FCC, our actions did not extend to broadband,” she said in her remarks at the meeting. “Our national security agencies have detailed information about how Chinese state-owned carriers and others have exploited insecure Internet routing protocols to hijack our Internet traffic. When we were asked to do something about it, the best we could offer, thanks to the last FCC withdrawing from the broadband dispute, was a forum in the Commission’s boardroom. I don’t think that will deter our opponents.”
However, it is not just the US that is playing night and night games with China. There are also domestic issues to address: The FCC recently redefined broadband as 100 megabits in transmission and 25 megabits in transmission. The morning the change went into effect, I received an email from Xfinity informing me that my speeds had magically been updated at no cost to me. Generous, right? Of course, if the FCC hadn’t done that, I would have paid more and more for the lowest speed they thought they could get away with.
FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel. Photo credit: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
The same goes for zero rating, where an ISP doesn’t count certain services, like a streaming platform they own or partner with, toward your bandwidth cap. If these aren’t nipped in the bud, you’ll end up with a bunch of terrible packages between favorite companies – and with a lot of TV now streaming, that’s more important than ever in the home broadband space. What stands between you and a Cox Gigabit Plus exclusive for the next season of Bridgerton? The FCC, now.
Rosenworcel summed it up best: “I think in a modern digital economy we should have a national net neutrality policy and make it clear that the country’s communications expert has the power to act when it comes to broadband.” That’s really all.
Wondering why it took so long? Senate Republicans blocked the nomination of a fifth commissioner for years, preventing the agency from doing any real work. When Anna Gomez was finally confirmed, the net neutrality proposal came out within weeks.
Of course, as I recently pointed out, the new net neutrality rules are far from secure. They must withstand challenges in court and, depending on the outcome of the election, they could simply be reversed or abolished by law. On the other hand, these rules could be enshrined in law under a friendly government in the next legislative period.
Rosenworcel specifically cited California’s net neutrality rules as an example of what happens when you can’t rely on federal authorities. While she is obviously grateful for California’s legislative stance, there may be issues where the two rules conflict. But setting national regulation as a baseline level of protection, as we do in so many other industries, seems to be the bare minimum.
It will take some time for the rules to take effect because they must first be published in the Federal Register, and then there is another waiting period. But you probably won’t even notice when they do it. The companies that had tried, and occasionally did, to intervene in broadband traffic soon found that the risk wasn’t worth it due to consumer backlash and eventual federal protections. They were more or less on their best behavior because they knew this rule was probably coming – and it also gave them the excuse to say, “Anti-consumer practices, what anti-consumer practices?” We haven’t had anything like that in years made more!” Don’t believe them.
If you’re still curious about the new rule, there’s a nice informative page here (I learned things) and a video where Chairwoman Rosenworcel breaks it all down.