We're About to Lose Net Neutrality â€” And the Internet as We Know It | Wired
Adam Rifkin stashed this in Teh Internets
As a result, VerizonÂ tookÂ the FCC to court to void the 2010 FCC rule. Verizon went to court to attack the part of the rule forbidding them from discriminating among websites and applications; from setting up â€” on what we once called the information superhighway â€” the equivalents of tollbooths, fast lanes, and dirt roads.
So thatâ€™s where we are today â€” waiting for the second most powerful court in the nation, the DC Circuit, to rule in Verizonâ€™s case. During the caseâ€™s oral argument, back in early September, corporate lobbyists, lawyers, financial analysts, and consumer advocates packed into the courtroom: some sitting, some standing, some relegated to an overflow room.
Since then, everyone interested in internet freedom has been waiting for an opinion â€” including everyday folks who search the web or share their thoughts in 140 characters; and including me, who argued the first (losing) network neutrality case before the DC Circuit in 2010.
But, in their questions and statements during oral argument, the judges have made clear how they planned to rule â€” for the phone and cable companies, not for those who use the internet. While the FCC has the power to impose the toothless â€śno-blockingâ€ť rule (originally proposed by AT&T above), it does not (the court will say) have the power to impose the essential â€śnondiscriminationâ€ť rule.
It looks like weâ€™ll end up where AT&T initially began: a false compromise.
The implications of such a decision would be profound. Web and mobile companies will live or die not on the merits of their technology and design, but on the deals they can strike with AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, and others. This means large phone and cable companies will be able to â€śshakedownâ€ť startups and established companies in every sector, requiring payment for reliable service. In fact, during the oral argument in the current case, Verizonâ€™s lawyer said, â€śIâ€™m authorized to state from my client today that but for these [FCC] rules we would be exploring those types of arrangements.â€ť
Wait, it gets even worse. Pricing isnâ€™t even a necessary forcing factor. Once the court voids the nondiscrimination rule, AT&T, Verizon, and Comcast will be able to deliver some sites and services more quickly and reliably than others forany reason. Whim. Envy. Ignorance. Competition. Vengeance. Whatever. Or, no reason at all.
So what if youâ€™ve got a great new company, an amazing group of founders, a seat in a reputable accelerator program, great investors and mentors. With the permission-based innovation over â€śour pipesâ€ť desired from the likes of Comcast, Verizon and AT&Tâ€¦ thereâ€™s no meritocracy here.
Of course, despite everything the judges suggested during the two-hour argument, itâ€™s possible that they offer net neutrality a reprieve. Given how sticky this morass is, thereâ€™s one simple way for you to judge the opinion: If the court throws out the non-discrimination rule, permission-less innovation on the internet as we know it is done. If the nondiscrimination rule miraculously survives, then, for now at least, so too will freedom on the internet.