Internet neutrality: a major win, but the war continues
In the end, the public’s wishes and best interests won the day: yesterday, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), approved its network neutrality plan, which reclassifies broadband internet as a Title II public utility, giving the agency more regulatory power in the process, meaning that suppliers will be considered common carriers. In practice, this will prevent communications companies from slowing down or blocking some services so as to provide others, in return for money with faster service — the main element in the debate, and which has sparked widespread debate on the neutrality of the internet.
Thursday’s decision is a momentous one. I have written about internet neutrality on innumerable occasions, and even took part in the presentation of a motion to the Spanish Senate to try to guarantee this under Spanish law, and the scenario that began to emerge in the wake of the FCC’s decision is better than could have been hoped for. It is clear and unequivocal, and leaves no room for doubts as to what telecommunications providers can do on both fixed line and cellular networks. To better understand the enormity of the decision, read the reactions of the main people involved, for example, a great article by Tim Wu, who actually invented the term network neutrality.
The result of yesterday’s vote is a huge triumph for civic activism and participation in the face of the telecommunications lobby. Net neutrality was one of Barack Obama’s election promises back in 2008, but over the course of the first and second legislatures, lobbying and the failure of the first effort to have it enshrined in law by Julius Genachowski, as well as the FCC’s own inaction and the subsequent appointment of Tom Wheeler at the head of the organization, all suggested the worst. In fact Wheeler’s first efforts were clearly in favor of the telecommunications companies.
It has been thanks to awareness campaigns, publications, calls, letters, demonstrations and all kinds of other civic action that led Obama to strengthen position in defense of internet neutrality, and that led to this vote. The FCC is an independent agency, but contrary to what happens in simulated democracies like Spain, where the supposed representatives of the electorate can do what they like, in the United States taking decisions that go against the wishes of tax payers is a real problem. Once a tipping point had been reached, the FCC could no longer pretend not to be listening to what the people and the experts were saying. And quite simply, it has done this: it’s listened to the people.
The clearest indication of just how good a decision this was has been the furious reaction from Verizon, which has threatened to take legal action against the FCC, and replied using Morse code. But the thing is, that the FCC’s decision isn’t outdated: it’s about defending tax payers from the infinite greed of companies like yours, and that want to convert the internet into a new version of cable television, where only those companies that reach financial agreements with yours can be sure of speedy traffic flow. Industry threats to pull out of investing in broad band are of little concern either: if they don’t invest in fiber optics, then other players will come along and take their place; quite simply, in this environment, money doesn’t sit around on tables for long before somebody comes along with an offer to take it.
In fact, another outcome of yesterday’s decision is that local councils and municipal administrations can now invest public money to provide broad band to the public, overturning previous legislation that prevented this. It’s clear where things are going in the United States: in a growing number of cities, the best broad band is not supplied by traditional telecommunications providers, but by companies like Google.
The war’s not over yet. The US Congress has to vote on this, and it is filled with Republicans in the pay of lobbies are promising to fight on, once again against the interest of the people who voted them into office. US activism will have to keep ahead of the attacks by legislators, as well as keeping an eye out for any loopholes the FCC may have provided.
Now is the time to plan ahead. And now is the time for the guarantees US voters enjoy to the rest of the world: in Europe, proposals for a single telecommunications market could be an important step, but we still need to keep an eye on lawmakers that want to relax the rules. And in the rest of the world, other countries are fighting their own battles: the victory in the United States will doubtless give them hope. But the activism must continue: writing, discussing, and making sure that our interests are represented.
At the same time, internet neutrality doesn’t begin and end with preventing telecommunications companies from having their way: zombie cookies that spy on you (check if your operator uses them by accessing this page from your smartphone with the WiFi off and when you are using a 3G or 4G network, you might be surprised at what you find. The internet is too important to leave it in the hands of a few telecommunications companies that have shown on too many occasions just how greedy and irresponsible they are. The internet is the new politics.
(En español, aquí)
