Net neutrality to get new life in Congress
Just in time for presidential primary season, a key Democrat who championed Net neutrality laws during the last Congress is finally planning to try again.

Rep. Edward Markey
(Credit: U.S. House of Representatives)Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.), the chairman of a House of Representatives Internet and telecommunications panel, is readying a new version of his Network Neutrality Act, which was twice defeated by the Republican-controlled Congress during its consideration of a sweeping broadband policy bill last year.
Markey plans to introduce the new effort, which will "closely follow" the old one, during the next two to three weeks, shortly before Congress adjourns for the year, a spokeswoman told CNET News.com on Tuesday. Further action, including hearings, is expected in the new year.
National Journal's Technology Daily reported Markey's plans on Monday.
Net neutrality, of course, is the idea that broadband operators shouldn't be allowed to charge content providers extra fees for premium placement or delivery, nor should they be permitted to prioritize or discriminate against content.
Markey's previous bill would have required, among other things, that a network operator "not discriminate in favor of itself in the allocation, use, or quality of broadband services or interconnection with other broadband networks." "Interference and surcharges" on outside content and applications would be prohibited, as would installation of "network features, functions, or capabilities that thwart or frustrate compliance with the requirements or objectives" of the law. Failure to comply could result in fines or other punishments, including payment of damages to the complaining party.
Consumer groups and major Internet companies like Google and Amazon.com argue it's necessary to enact new regulations barring such activity, while broadband operators like AT&T and Comcast counter that the market will solve any perceived problems. Opponents of new laws also claim there's no evidence that broadband providers are throttling content in devious ways, although the recent brouhaha over Comcast's reportedly aggressive management of BitTorrent and other peer-to-peer file-sharing traffic has reignited Net neutrality advocates' calls for antidiscrimination rules.
Views on the need for new laws have tended to split along party lines, with Democrats generally supporting them and Republicans opposing them. Even so, virtually no action has occurred in this year's Democratic-controlled Congress--aside from the early-January reintroduction of last year's Senate proposal, which hasn't gone anywhere since--leaving some to ponder whether the debate is dead.
Along with recent pledges from Democratic presidential candidates like Barack Obama to enact Net neutrality laws if elected president, Markey's planned reintroduction indicates the sleeping beast may awaken yet.
- Tags:
-
net neutrality,
-
legislation,
-
Congress
- Bookmark:
- Digg
- Del.icio.us







I wonder how they are going to reconcile all this.
Very quickly, each and every party becomes a special interest. This means that the customer is put in the back seat as each party tries to influence the various government entities involved. So what happens? What happens is the big guys are the ones who can afford lobbyists and to other ways to influence and the small guys are pushed out. Very quickly, the biggest technical and economic challenges that entrepreneurs have to overcome become tiny as compared to the legal and political issues that Net Neutrality will create.
I don't know why more people don't see any of this.
Net Neutrality is in fact the opposite of Democracy. Without thinking, it sounds good, but it's a terrible idea. I make sure to bring it up with people to show them how nasty this is. I suggest everyone do the same. KEEP THE GOVERNMENT OUT - NO SOCIALISM.
protect quality of service for all. After all, it's the plan the service
providers came up with in the first place.
When I call my cable/dsl company for a connection, they usually
offer me one or more options like: Basic speed = $24/mo,
Medium speed = $50/mo. and Fast speed = $60/mo.
I pay for the connection on my end, YouTube and other 'High-
value' sites that consume lots of bandwidth pay for the
connection on their end.
Even if I used the full amount of my bandwidth to download
video after video from YouTube, I've already paid for that
bandwdth and so has YouTube.
Companies that argue against net neutrality are just to charge
us again for the same service we're already paying for.
As for people who try to compare this issue to something like
Socialism, they're just trying to confuse you by muddying the
waters of the real issue.