In September, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski gave the Net Neutrality speech at the Brookings Institute. He promoted an open Internet and offered some policy advice/rules to move us forward:
- Network operators cannot prevent users from accessing the lawful Internet content, applications, and services of their choice, nor can they prohibit users from attaching non-harmful devices to the network.
- Broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications.
- Providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices.
Loads of people like this idea. For a glimpse at those people, check out the About page of Save the Internet. A lot of Internet providers, especially big ones, don’t love the idea. The Daily Yonder provided a great synopsis of the pro and con sides: “At its core, the net neutrality debate pits those who believe the Internet is a channel for open communications against those whose best financial interests lie in a controlled Internet.”
Earlier this week, at the Future of Music policy summit at Georgetown University in Washington, Senator Al Franken was even more passionate with his views on Net Neutrality:
“Free speech limited, or free speech slowed down, is the same thing as free speech denied,” Franken said, adding that rural users, including some of Franken’s constituents who have only one option for broadband service, could be hurt the most. “ISP profit margins should never come at the cost of free speech and an open internet,” Franken said, “because while they may profit, we lose.”
This weekend, Peter Fleck and Jeff Pesek will be talking about Net Neutrality and Censorship at an Unsummit in Minneapolis. It will be interesting to see if they invoke Franken’s opinions. I’m hoping to attend so I’ll report in on it.