The Supreme Court’s decision in the Brand X case today basically upheld the status quo by affirming the FCC’s ruling to classify cable modem service as an information service, and hence free of open access-type requirements. Although the Court’s decision did little to change the current environment - cable modem service has always been free of common carrier regulations - it will likely spur some strategic public policy shifts among phone companies and among proponents of network neutrality.
Incumbent telcos hope the Court’s decision will advance the ball on their efforts to free DSL service from regulation. The U.S. Telecom Association, which represents big and small phone companies, applauded the decision and said it’s now time for the FCC to apply the same information service classification to phone companies. In a statement, USTA head Walter McCormick said:
Today’s Supreme Court decision clarifies the Commission’s role in setting a framework for service providers in the rapidly changing communications market. While this was the correct decision for the cable industry, it further highlights why all providers must be given the same incentive to invest and deploy new technologies. We applaud the FCC’s victory today and urge policymakers to finish this important job by crafting similar rules for all broadband providers to ensure a consumer-driven, highly competitive and innovative American communications market.
BellSouth and SBC both issued similar statements asking the FCC to decide that DSL service move forward without the threat of access requirements.
Even the cable industry, the big winner in today’s decision, won’t raise much of a ruckus if the Commission chooses to give phone companies a break on DSL regulation. Speaking during a conference call to discuss the Brand X opinion, National Cable Telecommunications Association CEO Kyle McSlarrow said “our posture has been two-fold. Number one, we’re for more deregulation…Number two we think like services should be treated alike.” McSlarrow said he sees no reason why DSL shouldn’t also be classified as an information service.
But the real fallout of the Brand X decision could be to give the notion of network neutrality greater momentum. Net neutrality is the concept of mandating that broadband providers deliver Internet content or applications regardless of the content involved, an idea gaining currency in Washington in order to prevent phone and cable companies from blocking services, such as VoIP, that compete with those offered over their own networks.
Gigi Sohn, President of Public Knowledge, a DC-based interest group, rallied the troops around the net neutrality flag. In a statement, she said:
“The Court’s decision today in the Brand X case raises the question of whether Congress, in tackling its next revision of the Telecommunications Act, should act to ensure that communications, content, and applications are allowed to pass freely over the Internet’s broadband pipes. We believe Congress should do so, because ‘net neutrality’ is a worthy goal that not only will promote free speech and creativity on the Internet, but also will benefit those who provide broadband connectivity by making that connectivity more valuable.”
Cable, on the other hand, isn’t buying it. During the Brand X conference call, NCTA’s McSlarrow said:
Network neutrality is no such thing. The idea behind proponents of network neutrality is that somehow there is a problem and we need to provide a solution. There is no problem today - a cable customer can go anywhere they want on the web. It is in our business interest to keep a cable customer happy.
Cynthia Brumfield at 7:30 PM|Comments(0)
Blogs We Read
