Where is the Greatest Threat to Internet Openness?

By

Regulatory attorneys are always required to advance the strongest-possible arguments in favor of their firm’s or client’s interests, when the Federal Communications Commission or any other regulatory body is considering new rules.

So it is not surprising that Time Warner Cable’s filing with the FCC regarding notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on the “Open Internet” opposes Title II regulation of access services, argues that fixed and mobile ISPs should be subject to the same rules, or argues network interconnection should not be included in the rules.

Cable companies traditionally have opposed common carrier regulation. And as a competitive issue, cable companies would not want mobile ISPs to have an edge. Time Warner Cable (TWC) also opposes extension of new regulations for network interconnection, which traditionally has been a matter of business relationships between network owners.

The novel idea is TWC’s suggestion that all potential threats to openness in the ecosystem be examined, including the role of large content or app providers who also could threaten openness.

“The NPRM fails to acknowledge that the real — and growing — threat to Internet openness continues to be posed by entities other than broadband Internet access providers,” TWC argues.

Time Warner Cable’s suggestions are unlikely to have any effect, as the language of the NPRM already notes that although “other forms of discrimination in the Internet ecosystem may exist … such conduct is beyond the scope of this proceeding.”

Some might find the Time Warner Cable suggestion unusual. But it is the sort of perspective one might expect from a provider of third-party content, accustomed to fierce negotiations with those partners.

“Several large-edge providers have not only the ability to restrict access to online content and services, but also troubling track records of doing so,” TWC argues.

What Time Warner Cable might be suggesting is that large app and content providers have as much “incentive” to restrict “openness” for commercial advantage.

“The NPRM overlooks the reality that large-edge providers often have far more market leverage than a broadband ISP. There is no sound reason to single out broadband Internet access providers and exclude other sources of harm from the scope of any rules,” TWC argues.




Edited by Rory J. Thompson

Contributing Editor

SHARE THIS ARTICLE
Related Articles

How Can I Tell If a Website Is Safe? Watch for These Important Signs

By: Special Guest    6/30/2020

It seems we spend the bulk of our time on devices these days, and many of us depend on the internet to help us complete our jobs, communicate with fam…

Read More

Using Data Analytics and Technology to Combat the Impacts of the Global Pandemic

By: Arti Loftus    6/25/2020

The Coronavirus pandemic has driven leaders to rethink the way that we do things, and although the threat to our health has placed many obstacles in o…

Read More

Cloud computing - can it be the key to the future of our society?

By: Special Guest    6/24/2020

Cloud computing is far from being a novelty technology, but it's only recently that we've started to really use it to its full potential. The global c…

Read More

Cryptocurrency Trading Strategies: Complete Guide

By: Special Guest    6/24/2020

Today we get to the heart of the matter, that is, we will study all the most interesting and productive strategies for investing in cryptocurrencies a…

Read More

What is Node.js used for, and what global companies use it?

By: Special Guest    6/24/2020

Hiring the software development talent pool for an innovative IT project has been a challenge for big companies and start-ups. They have to explore th…

Read More