As the dust has settled from the D.C. Circuit’s January 14th decision to vacate and remand the FCC Open Internet Order for another try, and from FCC Chairman Wheeler’s February 19th statement accepting the court’s invitation to propose open Internet rules that could pass court muster, what does it all this mean going forward?
Tagged: net neutrality
Given the competition in the wireless broadband market – indeed, in the broadband marketplace at large – the costs of the FCC interfering with proposals like AT&T’s are likely to outweigh the benefits.
Activists are freaking out about AT&T’s Sponsored Data plan because it defiles their utopian ideal of perfect Internet egalitarianism of universal, unlimited, free, downstream-bandwidth for edge creators.
The fact that U.S. senators and representatives imagine that a billing dispute among companies could be considered a net neutrality violation illustrates how arbitrary and capricious net neutrality politics and the FCC’s Open Internet order have become.
We should all expect users to be able to access the content, apps, and devices of their choice on the Internet, and recognize that most essential enabler of that choice on the Internet is sound economics and market forces.
Since the EU is already pushing net neutrality regulation of broadband and set on banning mobile roaming charges in the EU, it would not be surprising for the EU to propose that the U.S. also adopt net neutrality and broadband pricing restrictions in order to “harmonize” the EU-U.S. communications market as part of the upcoming U.S.-EU Free Trade Agreement.