Is The Web Really Free? Comcast Spats With FCC Over User Rights

Buy an ad on DigitalJournal.com

The FCC (Federal Communications Commission) and Comcast Corp are embroiled in a joust and the entire wired world is watching with keen interest. The results could help to establish some common laws for the Net.

For the uninitiated Comcast Corp is the largest cable television company and the second largest Internet service provider in the United States. Comcast has a customer base of 24.2 million cable customers, 14.7 million digital cable customers and 12.9 million high-speed Internet customers.

In the other corner is the FCC. The FCC is a governmental regulatory agency which monitors all non-Federal Government use of the radio spectrum (including radio and television broadcasting), and all interstate telecommunications (wire, satellite and cable) as well as all international communications that originate or terminate in the United States. It has one weapon in its arsenal to wield and that is revoking broadcast licenses.

The genesis of the spat lies in a complaint filed against Comcast, that the company had blocked Internet traffic among users of a certain type of "file sharing" software that allows them to exchange large amounts of data. The complaint was filed by the Free Press and Public Knowledge, nonprofit public interest groups that advocate for "network neutrality," the idea that all Internet content should be treated equally. And ISPs cannot 'impose' themselves between customers and their online activities.

FCC Chairman Kevin Martin said in a statement that Comcast not only "arbitrarily" blocked Internet access to a set of customers but also failed to disclose to consumers that it was doing so. This was according to the Chairman an abject disregard of the principles laid down by the commission.

"The commission has adopted a set of principles that protects consumers’ access to the Internet. We found that Comcast's actions in this instance violated our principles."

Comcast on their part issued a communiqué with a strong denial. The company spokeswoman Sena Fitzmaurice stated that Comcast takes 'carefully limited measures' to 'manage' traffic on its network and this is a reasonable part of its strategy to ensure quality of service for all customers.

Apparently, it seems to be that the moot points of the argument lie in between the words voiced by both the parties.

The FCC had approved a policy statement in September 2005 that outlined a set of principles meant to ensure that broadband networks are "widely deployed, open, affordable and accessible to all consumers." But it was also marked that the principles were 'subject to reasonable network management'.

Comcast has seized this wording in its defense and has pointed out the vagueness of the brief. It argues that the commission has never provided sufficient guidance on the principles laid out.

The FCC Chairman remains unconvinced so far and has promised enforcement action against the company. The next step forward for the commission would be put to a vote among its five members. Now, this is where it gets a bit complicated (and political)...
The FCC is managed by five Commissioners appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate for 5-year terms. One of the Commissioners is designated by the President to be the Chairman. On the latest panel, three are Republicans and two are Democrats.

This will be the first test for the Commission as there is presently no law on network neutrality. Both the House and Senate have sponsored network neutrality bills, but they have never come close to becoming law. It is expected that Kevin Martin will get the majority and press for actions.

That would entail Comcast to stop its practice of blocking; provide details to the commission on the extent and manner in which the traffic has been throttled; and to disclose to consumers details on its future plans for managing its network. A large broadcaster like Comcast just might chuck up as and when it feels the pinch, but this action by the regulatory body is sure to have ripple effects for all ISPs who have long argued that network monitoring is their exclusive right.

But consumers just might beg to differ. Nobody for sure, likes a Big Brother.