Four Key Facts about the Open Internet
I wrote this for the USA Today where it was published today.
Americans deserve an open Internet: they had it before the D.C. Court decision, and they will continue to enjoy it now.
The court’s decision held that the FCC plays an important role in promoting a vibrant Internet with sufficient authority to police bad actors. Some are unsatisfied and want the FCC to have an even more muscular role over the Internet. They are pushing for the FCC to retreat from the long-standing bipartisan policy of light regulation and dump Internet services into the heavy regulatory bucket of the old-monopoly telephone system. The FCC would gain more power, but the Internet would suffer. One must ask, is the Internet so sick that it needs a heavy injection of rules and regulations to fix it? The answer is no.
By nearly any objective measure, the U.S. is a world leader in broadband. If you compare similarly sized regions, 10 of the top 16 fastest Internet regions in the world are American states. We are one of only two countries to have three different fully deployed broadband technologies actively competing against one another (cable, telephone, and 4G LTE wireless); and we have some of the most advanced networks in the world – connections capable of 100 Mbps and faster are available to 85 percent of U.S. homes (in Europe, connections of 30 Mbps or faster reach only 54 percent). U.S. broadband networks have given rise to the world’s top web companies, including Google, Facebook, Amazon and Twitter, and new exciting start-ups are born every day.
The U.S. invests more in broadband networks than any other country. Since the mid-1990’s, private companies have invested over $1 trillion to build and maintain our networks. Americans are just four percent of the world’s population but we have 25 percent of the world’s broadband investment. Today, broadband reaches 99 percent of Americans and, according to the White House, the broadband industry was one of the leading investors in the American economy even during the economic downturn.
We have an “open Internet.” Broadband providers continue to support the principles of an open Internet that allow consumers to access lawful websites when, where and how they choose. They support these concepts because they are what customers demand and they are good for business.
Reclassifying the Internet and applying telephone-era rules will choke off growth and investment.It would treat broadband as a common carrier service giving the FCC far reaching power to regulate rates and set economic terms and conditions for the markets. The confidence that our national broadband policy rests squarely on a light regulatory foundation would be fractured. Network investment would suffer, and the push to reach more households would slow. The FCC clearly has sufficient authority to protect consumers from harm and preserve the principles of openness we all share. We shouldn’t let imaginary tales of apocalypse lead us to abandon the light regulatory model that has served the Nation so well.
Director Security Services and Logistics Management at Nelson &Mercy Lucid Jobs Limited
9 年The point is that having an "open Internet" is good
Technology, Repaired Right.
10 年The citizens of the United States, while spending the most for internet development and services, both in taxpayer subsidies and direct service provider fees, have some of the slowest and least reliable connections to the internet in the world. Now, thanks to the Supreme Court, we will not only have the multiple tiers of overpriced services in the world, but also face corporate censorship of the internet though speed and access limits. The internet IS a common carrier. All internet service providers ARE common carriers. As such, the should be classified as such by the FCC. Further, due to the localized monopolistic nature of internet service providers, they should be even more regulated than just common carrier status. Where I live, I have basically two choices for ISP, Time-Warner or Froniter Communications. Sure, I can get something like Earthlink, but Earthlink has to rent space on Time-Warner's wires to provide that service. So I'm still dealing with Time-Warner in that instance. The other option would be dial-up, which puts me back onto Frontier or T-W for access to the POTS. Someday, maybe true 4G wireless will reach my home. Then I will have the option of one to four other service providers, three of whom have data caps, and all of whom have been proven to change their rate structures for data on whatever whim they choose. It is time for the FCC to take action to reclassify broadband, wired or wireless, as common carrier to protect both the consumer, and the "internet economy".
President and CEO at Strabala Services LLC
10 年Wow, yes.