News Heading

Internet Speed: What You Don’t Know About The Web

October 28, 2014

by Richard Bennett
Tech Policy Daily

High-speed (more correctly, “high capacity”) broadband networks are often touted as the cornerstones of a blazingly fast web experience, but this isn’t really the case. The other factors that influence the web experience are the capacity of web servers to respond to user requests and the ability of browsers and end user devices to render and display web pages. At the speeds that most Americans use today, these non-network factors account for 50 to more than 90 percent of the wait time to load web pages. Consequently, increasing network capacity has a minimal effect on the user experience of surfing the web. In fact, upgrading from a 10 Mbps broadband connection to a faster one is unlikely to produce a perceptible effect most of the time. Read More…

AT&T makes case for user-driven ‘fast lanes’

October 27, 2014

by Julian Hattem
The Hill

If people want to prioritize one website over another on their own Internet service, they should be able to, according to AT&T.

Company officials last week met with Federal Communications Commission (FCC) lawyers to argue that the agency should not ban Internet “fast lanes” that individual users want placed on their service.

For instance, a business might want to give workers faster access to certain websites over others when traffic gets clogged, to incentivize employees to stay on task rather than surf the web, AT&T argued. Read More…

Analyst accuses Netflix of telco, content industry ’shakedown’

October 27, 2014

Editor
Rapid TV News

In a withering attack on the SVOD leader, analyst Strand Consulting has accused Netflix of using double-talk, including ‘bogus’ speed index claims, to cement its market position.
In its research note, the analyst, which has always been a staunch defender of net neutrality, accuses Netflix of hijacking net neutrality for its business advantage and asserting that that there has always been more to Netflix’s success in being the world’s leading on-demand over the top (OTT) video service than “good content and cool technology”. Indeed it asserts that Netflix has played a shrewd PR and policy game to paint itself as the fragile underdog to regulators, journalists and the public while it fiercely lobbies for regulation against the telecom and content industries. Read More…

Getting it right on Internet regulation

October 27, 2014

Jeffrey Mazzella
Tennessean

Congress is notorious for a surplus of people pretending to be leaders, but not showing actual leadership.

Fortunately, U.S. Rep. Marsha Blackburn is an exception to that unfortunate truism.

Case in point: From health care to energy policy and beyond, the Brentwood Republican has been an effective advocate against an administration notorious for its abuses of executive power. That particularly holds true with regard to the Obama administration’s latest attempt to circumvent Congress and overregulate the Internet.

In May, the Federal Communications Commission unveiled “Net Regulation 3.0,” a proposal designed to grant itself massive new powers to regulate the Internet despite any defined need or congressional authority. Read More…

Hungary to impose world’s first internet tax

October 27, 2014

by Andrew Byrne
CNBC

Hungary is preparing to impose the world’s first tax on internet usage in the latest example of the unorthodox economic policies being pursued by President Viktor Orbán and his increasingly dominant Fidesz party.

Mihály Varga, economy minister, on Wednesday unveiled the plans, which include a charge of Ft150 (62 U.S. cents) for each gigabyte of internet data consumed. Mr Varga said the tax – to be paid by internet service providers – was a logical extension of levies on phone calls and text messages the government announced in 2011. Read More…

The T in Title II Stands for Taxes

October 29, 2014

NCTA
Platform

In response to proposed legislation imposing a tax on Internet use, tens of thousands of Hungarians have taken to the streets to protest this new tax.

These protests raise an important question – what would happen in the United States if the FCC were to impose a tax on Internet access services?

Unfortunately this is not a hypothetical question. While Congress generally is responsible for assessing taxes, the FCC requires all telecommunications carriers to contribute to the federal Universal Service Fund (USF). And if the FCC decided to regulate broadband as a Title II telecommunications service, customers for the first time would see the USF contribution fee assessed on their broadband bills. Read More…

Title II Would Not Ban Paid Prioritization

October 29, 2014

by Michael Horney
Free State Foundaition

Paid prioritization might be the most discussed topic in the Net Neutrality debate. The problem is that many of the people discussing it do not actually understand it. Paid prioritization is the act of edge providers paying Internet Service Providers (ISPs) for priority delivery over last-mile broadband networks. (For example, Netflix could pay Verizon a fee so high-definition video traffic is given a higher priority over other traffic on Verizon’s network.) However, there is no evidence that paid prioritization is occurring at this time.Last week, FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai led the “Forum on Internet Regulation” at Texas A&M University’s Bush School of Government and Public Service. Read More…

Internet Speed: What You Don’t Know About The Web

October 28, 2014

by Richard Bennett
Tech Policy Daily

High-speed (more correctly, “high capacity”) broadband networks are often touted as the cornerstones of a blazingly fast web experience, but this isn’t really the case. The other factors that influence the web experience are the capacity of web servers to respond to user requests and the ability of browsers and end user devices to render and display web pages. At the speeds that most Americans use today, these non-network factors account for 50 to more than 90 percent of the wait time to load web pages. Consequently, increasing network capacity has a minimal effect on the user experience of surfing the web. In fact, upgrading from a 10 Mbps broadband connection to a faster one is unlikely to produce a perceptible effect most of the time. Read More…

Netflix not playing nice?

October 28, 2014

by Bonnie Tubbs
Info Seal

While South African consumers may be eagerly awaiting the official arrival of on-demand over-the-top (OTT) video service Netflix, SA’s telecoms operators are likely to be less enthusiastic.

It will also mean the country’s telecoms regulator will be presented with the challenge of weighing up net neutrality with fair data traffic management.

The US-based video-on-demand (VOD) provider has been rumoured to be in talks with local operators around bringing its services to SA, although nothing has been confirmed. In the meantime, “back door” online services like UnoTelly are allowing local Internet users to access the service, as well as others yet to reach our shores, like Amazon and Hulu. Read More…

FCC “secret” tax plan a threat to the Internet

October 28, 2014

by Erik Telford
The Detroit News

Earlier this year, Congress extended the Internet Tax Freedom Act to prevent new state and local taxes on Internet broadband access. But now, a push by the progressives to implement so called “Net Neutrality” may undermine that effort by imposing a huge new fee on interstate broadband that would drastically hinder broadband providers’ ability to provide affordable, quality Internet access to consumers.

Congress has been remarkably consistent over the past two decades in its position against levying taxes on the Internet, but by all indications, the FCC isn’t keen to abide by the spirit of the laws on the books. In a recent article for Forbes, former FCC Commissioner Harold Furchtgott-Roth explains how the agency could push Net Neutrality by way of a very loose interpretation of Title II of the Communications Act of 1934. Read More…

Utility Regulation Will Make the Internet Rusty

October 10, 2014

Mike Wendy
Media Freedom

No one loves their public utilities. They’re slow, unresponsive to change, and only just good enough for government work, which isn’t saying much.

If you’d talk to progressives working in the Internet space, though, you’d hear a different story. They think that utilities, and the 19th Century regulation used to control them, are the greatest things since sliced bread.  You see, they want to make private U.S. broadband providers public utilities, and radical groups like Free Press, Public Knowledge and MoveOn.org have pulled out all of the stops to get the Federal Communications Commission to do so.

Why? Read More…

Free State Foundation Comments

September 17, 2014

by Free State Foundation

On the issue of            )           AT&T and Direct TV merger

COMMENTS OF
THE FREE STATE FOUNDATION*
I. Introduction and Summary
These comments are filed in response to the Commission’s request for comments
concerning the agency’s review of the transfer of control of licenses in connection with the
proposed acquisition of DIRECTV by AT&T Inc. These comments do not endorse or oppose the
proposed merger. Rather, their purpose is to set out baseline principles by which the Commission
should evaluate this as well as other mergers and to provide a summary analysis of
AT&T/DIRECTV in light of those principles.
Mergers and acquisitions are competitive entrepreneurial activities Read More…

Free-Market Advocates’ Comments to FCC, Opposing Internet Regulation

July 15, 2014

Before the

Federal Communications Commission

Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of  Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet

GN Docket No. 14-28

Comments of

Free-Market Advocates Opposed to Internet Regulation

For 10 years officials at the Federal Communications Commission have told Americans that the Internet will “break” unless the agency steps in to keep it “free and open.”  All the while, the Internet’s privately driven development has been vibrant, relentless and universal.  Nevertheless, at points during this same period the Commission twice sought to encumber the Internet with restrictive common carrier-like, Net Neutrality regulations.  In response to each of these actions, the DC Circuit twice struck down the agency’s overreach.  In the latest DC Circuit ruling – Verizon v. FCC[1] – the Court struck down the main thrust of the Commission’s arguments, but found that the Commission had some authority under Section 706 of the Communications Act.   The Commission has apparently undertaken the present Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to once again establish a regulatory regime in the absence of a market failure or a clear Congressional grant of authority.

The Internet is “free and open,” making the vast “network of networks” an integral engine for societal growth, participatory democracy and global commerce.  Its healthy development came primarily through the lack of government regulation, not because of it.  Although the Court seems to have offered the FCC a very narrow pathway to impose some form of Net Neutrality regulation on the Internet, nothing demands that the FCC go forward with its present plans.

Read More…

IFC Reply Comments to FCC: Title II Reclassification Unjustified, Unnecessary

August 12, 2010

Before the

Federal Communications Commission

Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of Framework for Broadband Internet Service                    

GN Docket No. 10-127

FCC Docket No. 10-114

 Reply Comments

of the Undersigned Members of the

INTERNET FREEDOM COALITION

Introduction

The Commission is being asked by Free Press and other organizations to pursue a radical course of action – reclassifying information services as telecommunications services in order to regulate the Internet for the first time.  We write to urge the Commission to keep the Internet free of new government regulation and taxation and to refrain from rushing into such a potentially disastrous course of action.

Analysts are only beginning to grasp the extent of the disruptive and destructive consequences of regulating the Internet under Title II of the Communications Act, and the Commission is in no position to predict the outcome, much less assure Americans it will be positive.  Americans have heard political leaders admit that we will not know the full extent or nature of massive health care and financial services regulations until after the underlying legislation has been passed.  Now, Americans are facing the imposition of an even lesser-understood regulatory regime over the Internet without the benefit of any legislative process whatsoever.

CLICK HERE FOR PDF

IFC Supplemental Reply Comments: FCC Lacks Authority, Justification for Reclassifying Internet as Title II Service

April 26, 2010

Before the

Federal Communications Commission

Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of
Preserving the Open Internet              GN Docket No. 09-191                                  
Broadband Industry Practices            WC Docket No. 07-52

Supplemental Reply Comments of the Internet Freedom Coalition

Just two days prior to the Commission’s deadline for reply comments regarding the above Notice of Proposed Rulemakings, the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in Comcast v. FCC that the Commission has no authority to enact Net Neutrality rules.  The deadline for comments was extended, particularly to facilitate discussion of other methods of promulgating Net Neutrality regulations.

 Beginning with comments on the National Broadband Plan filed by Public Knowledge in January, a small number of organizations have since proposed classifying the Internet as a Title II common carrier service as a way of asserting the Commission’s authority to enact Net Neutrality regulations.  The Internet Freedom Coalition respectfully submits these reply comments in strong opposition to any effort to reclassify the Internet as a Title II service.

Read More…

Social Heading