Net Neutrality Rules Harmful, Commenters Tell FCC
Net neutrality rules would harm consumers and thwart competition, according to a preliminary review of groups’ responses to the FCC’s call for comments on whether network access rules are needed. Most groups responding were telecom-related businesses, free-market advocacy organizations and trade associations. All said imposition of regulation would hinder development of the next-generation Internet and contended there’s no need for the rules since current govt. regulations can punish any discriminatory behavior.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
“There is no current or anticipated content discrimination or service degradation justifying new regulation by the Commission,” said a filing by Hands Off the Internet, which represents business opposed to net neutrality and has former Clinton press secy. Mike McCurry as a spokesperson. The group released a study it said documents the problems that regulations would cause. “Current regulation and consumer protection laws are sufficient to address any potential harms, which have been greatly exaggerated by those advocating net neutrality regulation,” the filing said.
“For nearly two years, we have heard calls based on nothing but inflammatory hypotheticals to regulate the Internet,” said USTelecom Pres. Walter McCormick. There is no evidence to justify the need, and the FCC needs to “move beyond the overblown rhetoric.” Verizon agreed “there is no history of problems that could indicate a need for regulatory intervention.” Competition in broadband services is growing, making it less likely that the Commission would need to prescribe a “regulatory cure,” Verizon’s filing said. The Commission should reject proposals for “net neutrality” obligations and keep the Internet unregulated, AT&T said in its filing.
NCTA said the Commission’s hands-off approach has stimulated competition between networks. Changing course would be a mistake, the cable group’s filing said. Regulation, no matter how well-intentioned, “almost certainly would reduce competitive investment and constrain growth in networks and the services that depend on them.” The Fiber- to-the-Home (FTTH) Council, which also opposes net neutrality, said there isn’t evidence that network platform providers are engaging in anticompetitive behavior. On the contrary, there’s a “heightened state of vigilance” regarding discriminatory practices on the Internet, FTTH’s filing said. Networks with increased bandwidth are less prone to congestion and have little need to prioritize transmissions, the filing said, concluding that “greater capacity makes the non-discrimination debate recede.”
“There simply isn’t a problem that needs to be regulated,” said U.S. Internet Industry Assn. (USIIA) Pres. Dave McClure: Calls for regulation are based on “fears and speculation,” not facts. If the Commission bases its regulatory decisions on “unfounded speculation,” the result will be stifled investment, slower broadband deployment and harm to consumers, he said. The National Assn. of Manufacturers (NAM) also opposes the regulations, saying they're necessary only when markets fail. The FCC should “stay the course,” said Marc-Anthony Signorino, NAM dir- technology policy.
Smaller groups weighed in with similar arguments. MovieFlix and Doctors TeleHealth urged the FCC not to adopt net neutrality regulations because it would have “unintended consequences.” The free-market group Americans for Prosperity, along with other members of the Internet Freedom Coalition, said in their filing that regulations aren’t needed.