US unveils new net neutrality rules

WASHINGTON, USA: The top U.S. communications regulator unveiled new proposals aimed at ensuring that network operators treat the flow of Internet content without discrimination, a move that was welcomed by consumer advocacy groups but may be blow for major U.S. providers.

Under the rules proposed by Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski on Monday, operators would not be able to discriminate on how they handle Internet content or applications on their networks and would have to make network management practices transparent.

Advocates of net neutrality say service providers must be barred from blocking or slowing Internet traffic based on the content being sent or downloaded.

The concept, referred to as net neutrality, pits open Internet companies like Google Inc against broadband service providers such as AT&T Inc, Verizon Communications Inc and Comcast Corp, which oppose new rules governing network management.

"Today, we can't imagine what our lives would be like without the Internet - any more than we can imagine life without running water or the light bulb," Genachowski said in his first major policy speech at the Brookings Institution, a public-policy think tank.

But service providers say the increasing volume of bandwidth-hogging services - such as video sharing - requires active management of their networks and some argue that net neutrality could stifle innovation.

AT&T spokesman Michael Coe said the company would review the new proposals before commenting. Verizon spokesman David Fish said his company would likely comment later in the day. Comcast had no immediate comment.

The rules, which would apply to both wireless and landline services, will be formally proposed at an open meeting in October. Genachowski, a Democrat, chairs a panel with two other Democrats and two Republicans.

"We could not be more pleased to see Chairman Genachowski take up this mantle," Vint Cerf, Google's chief Internet evangelist, said.

John Silver, executive director of advocacy group Free Press applauded the proposal in a statement, "This is a tremendous day for millions of us who have been clamoring to keep the Internet free from discrimination."

Anti-discrimination, pro transparency

Genachowski proposed codifying the new principles with the the existing four principles, issued several years ago by the FCC. They say that 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.

Gartner analyst Alex Winogradoff said the proposed rules seemed at first glance to be a good compromise between the opposing perspectives of consumer advocates and carriers.

"It's looking at the situation from a real world perspective. There is no way way you can force the carriers to invest unlimited amounts of money for unlimited bandwidth without somebody paying for it," he said.

But Winogradoff said "it will be in the fine print of the actual rules that may be adopted that will determine to what degree the FCC has sided with one side or the other."

In an effort to reassure businesses, Genachowski said providers will not be required to disclose personal information about subscribers or information that might compromise the security of the network.

Because the issue could have broad implications on content and applications -- such as Internet phone calling services provided by several companies like eBay Inc's Skype and Google -- agency staff are also likely to propose giving the public a lengthy amount of time to comment.

Advocates of net neutrality received a big boost last week when House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman threw his support behind a bill aimed at ensuring an "open Internet."

The speech coincides with a Monday deadline for the FCC to file a court brief in a case against Comcast, which is challenging whether the agency has the authority to regulate actions involving the Internet.

The FCC is expected to defend its position by arguing that the agency has broad authority under the 1996 Telecommunications Act.