On Friday, the Federal Communications Commission released a three page ruling finding that Comcast’s network management practices “unduly interfered with Internet users’ right to access the lawful Internet content and to use the applications of their choice.”
While the order is a win for net-neutrality advocates, Google’s Public Policy Blog points out that it leaves unanswered a critical question: What’s a reasonable approach for managing broadband networks?
The order states that Comcast “has an anti-competitive motive to interfere with customers’ use of peer-to-peer applications” but Comcast also has an obligation to provide a certain standard of service to their users who can be effected during times of network congestion, and compounded by a small percentage of those who are using disproportionate amounts of bandwidth.
So, argues Vint Cerf, Google’s Chief Internet Evangelist (because as you know, Google now owns the internet and if they don’t evangelize it who will?) “the real question for today’s broadband networks is not whether they need to be managed, but rather how.”
Metered pricing as we’ve argued here before is not a solution so much as another way for those that own network infrastructure to increase revenue. Cerf argues for transmission rate caps, “which would allow users to purchase access to the Internet at a given minimum data rate and be free to transfer data at at least up to that rate in any way they wish.”
Comcast was the first to be busted for their network practices but their problem is a larger issue facing all network operators. The FCC’s decision doesn’t make the question of how any easier to answer. In my mind, while potentially unpopular with the hands-off crowd the best long-term solution is independent oversight by an unbiased government agency of all U.S. networks.