Net Neutrality Advocates Praise Markey Bill

Net neutrality proponents gave high praise to the bill in a conference call Wednesday. Public Knowledge “wholeheartedly supports” the Markey bill, said founder Gigi Sohn. “It’s the right bill at the right time. It does the one thing we all really want, and that’s make nondiscrimination the law of the land.” The bill “is an important step in ensuring the Internet remains open for consumers and innovators,” said Markham Erickson, Open Internet Coalition executive director. The legislation is a “bold, sweeping approach” to keeping the Internet open and “would send a signal to the FCC” to move the Comcast- BitTorrent case forward “with all the speed and attention it deserves,” said Free Press’s Ben Scott.

The new net neutrality bill has a better chance of passing than previous ones, Sohn said. “What’s different this year is the momentum you have leading up to it,” she said. Historically, the main carrier argument against net neutrality legislation has been that it’s “a solution in search of a problem” she said. Now the FCC has three cases pending: the Comcast and Vuze petitions and a complaint about Verizon Wireless blocking text messages, she said. “Clearly this is a problem in search of a solution.”

Internet industry players also lauded the bill. “The tech community is firmly behind maintaining openness” and Amazon.com “welcomes” the Markey bill, said Amazon’s Paul Misener. It’s an “important boost” for net neutrality goals, agreed Rick Whitt, Washington telecom and media counsel for Google. It asks the “right questions” and gives regulators the “right tools,” he said.

CCIA welcomed the bill, saying “the lack of sufficient broadband competition in the marketplace is the key reason we believe light, focused legislation is necessary,” said a statement from the group’s president, Ed Black. “Our member companies and their customers all depend on neutral broadband access and Internet freedom for commercial activity,” Black said, urging the FCC to continue enforcing its basic Internet principles.

Educause “strongly support[s]” the net neutrality bill, said Mark Luker, vice president for the nonprofit. Broadband connections are only useful for colleges Educause represents if they support the online classroom and other applications they need, he said.

The Markey bill drew a skeptical response from Rep. Charlie Gonzalez, D-Texas, who called for a deeper understanding of Internet delivery services before proceeding with legislation. Some industry officials shared Gonzalez’s concerns. The legislation is “antithetical to the Congressional innovation agenda goals of extending broadband’s reach,” said a statement from USTelecom President Walter McCormick. The Markey bill would “blindly legislate a new national broadband policy, without regard to its implications, and then require the FCC to spend the next year determining whether the Internet is being constructed, managed and operated,” he said.

“This bill is an attempt to cure a problem that simply does not exist,” said CTIA President Steve Largent. Broadband is “spreading like wildfire,” Largent said, and consumers wouldn’t be using the technology if they weren’t getting good service. FCC Chairman Kevin Martin told reporters after the hearing he hadn’t had a chance to review the legislation because he was preparing for the DTV oversight hearing. While he hadn’t reviewed the bill, FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein praised the idea of a broadband summit to study the status of services, in comments to reporters.

Netcompetition.org called the bill a “wolf in sheep’s clothing.” It “seeks regulation of the Internet under the guise of ‘Internet freedom,'” said Chairman Scott Cleland.

The Markey bill is not pre-emptive regulation of net neutrality, but gives the FCC teeth to enforce an open Internet, supporters said. It’s “not regulation,” Whitt said. It clarifies that FCC authority should be used to stop net neutrality abuses, Scott said.