Next Phases of Net Neutrality Discussions Starting in Europe; FCC Releases New Order
The focus of the net neutrality debate could move to app or possibly device neutrality, said Andrea Glorioso, counselor at the Delegation to the European Union to the U.S., and the FCC released its order hours later. “Should an app store get to decide, or how should an app store get to decide what apps are provided over the app store?” Glorioso asked at an FCBA event Thursday. “I see that we’re moving in that direction, that really goes beyond the core net neutrality debate.” The text of the U.S. regulation is now on the FCC's website (see 1801040059), as expected (see 1801030040).
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.
Another question is whether anyone with a smartphone should have the right to decide what apps can be on the device, Glorioso said. “I don’t have that right,” he said. “There are certain applications that I cannot delete from this phone, or I cannot replace applications with an application of my choice.” The EU is likely at some point to look at that issue as well, he said. It initially didn’t see a need for net neutrality rules, but then members started to come forward with national rules, Glorioso said. “This, from our perspective, constituted a problem,” he said. “It was already creating fragmentation.”
Glorioso predicted the EU will at some point take up basic, “very hands-off rules” on device neutrality. If different countries have different rules “it’s a mess for European governments and citizens,” he said. Unlike the U.S., where the FCC recently repealed rules approved two years earlier (see 1712140039), the European rules are likely to be in place for the next five or 10 years, he said. “Most people are so afraid of reopening the whole debate that we’re going to just leave the rules as they are.”
Whether the European rules are good or bad, “they were the result of a very thorough negotiation,” Glorioso said. Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications Chairman Sébastien Soriano said last month that regardless of the FCC net neutrality vote, European rules likely won’t change (see 1712120001).
In Asia, there's much less of a coherent regional policy on net neutrality, said wireless and communications lawyer Michele Farquhar of Hogan Lovells. People often forget that India and China are two of the largest broadband markets, she said. “Asia is all over the map, both figuratively and literally,” she said. “They’ve taken generally more of hands-off approach than people might realize,” relying on antitrust principles and competition, she said. China “has more of a state-control framework,” she said.
Many view Japan as a model of effective local-loop unbundling and competition, Farquhar said. A more hands-off approach “seems to be working effectively,” she said. South Korea has relatively light-handed rules, with many exemptions, she said. But questions have been raised about carriers throttling VoIP and SK Telecom’s partnership with Pokemon Co. for a zero-rated service involving Pokemon Go. Elsewhere, Australia studied net neutrality but never approved rules, Farquhar said.
Net Neutrality Notebook
FCC release of a draft order to undo net neutrality had "some unintended consequences," Tech Policy Institute President Scott Wallsten said Thursday. "It created a flurry of activity when everybody with an opinion felt they had to re-litigate their arguments," he blogged. "Far too many chose it as an opportunity to hurl invectives at those with differing opinions." Chairman Ajit Pai's policy of releasing draft orders before commission meetings is nevertheless a key to making the "regulatory process more transparent," Wallsten said. He said the transparency is likely to trigger other actions once the order is released. "As soon as the final order is released, many [likely] will rush to compare the changes between the draft and final versions -- which is precisely what should happen," he wrote. "The changes themselves may turn out to be mundane and everyone will shrug and move on to the next phase of the fight, as they had planned. It seems likely that the additional light on the draft-to-final changes will work to keep the changes relatively small. That should be another benefit of the transparent approach."