NetNeutrality
Latest
Brazil passes an internet bill of rights enshrining net neutrality and privacy
While the world has been deciding who governs the internet, Brazil has been busy establishing internet rules of its own -- and they may just set an example for everyone else. The country has passed a bill of rights that goes some length towards protecting net neutrality and privacy. To start, the law promises equal access to the internet; carriers can't charge more for bandwidth-heavy services like streaming video.
WSJ: FCC's new net neutrality rules mean ISPs don't have to be neutral (update: FCC responds)
After existing Open Internet, or net neutrality, regulations were struck down in court earlier this year, it appears the FCC is ready to come back with new ones. Re/code reports Chairman Tom Wheeler confirmed they will be on the table at an agency meeting May 15th. While that report indicates the rules will be the same, but justified under a different part of the law, the Wall Street Journal's sources say that new rules will be proposed tomorrow, with at least one notable change. According to the rumor, the new net neutrality rules will still bar ISPs from blocking certain sources over the last mile, but will allow them to sell special access to others. It sounds like the type of "managed connection" that Comcast, for example, is using to distribute video on-demand to its Xbox 360 app. Update: The FCC has issued a statement, calling reports that it will gut the Open Internet rule "flat out wrong" and saying there is no turnaround in policy, and behavior that harms consumers or competition will not be permitted. A report in the Associated Press mentions that deals between ISPs and service providers were possible under the old rules but frowned upon, but the new rules will establish actual standards for them, added so it can survive a court challenge in the future. We'll find out exactly what there is tomorrow when the draft is posted, but before that consumer advocacy groups like Public Knowledge and Free Press are already speaking out on the matter.
AT&T thinks increased bandwidth costs are Netflix subscribers' problem
AT&T's swinging back at Netflix CEO Reed Hastings' recent assertion that ISPs (internet service providers) should shoulder the cost of increased bandwidth demands. In a post on AT&T's Public Policy Blog, Senior EVP Jim Cicconi denounced Hastings' desire for a "cost-free delivery" agreement with ISPs, saying that it unfairly shifts the burden of infrastructure cost to AT&T and its subscribers rather than to Netflix's own customer base. As Cicconi views it, that subscriber base is the very one responsible for the increased traffic demands and resulting need to build out additional facilities, and should therefore bear the brunt of a fee hike. In an attempt to highlight what he sees as Hastings' "arrogant proposition," Cicconi goes on to point out that this "self-righteous" streaming model is akin to Netflix "[demanding] a customer's neighbors" pay the cost of its DVD mail delivery service. The comparison isn't quite apple-to-apples, but his point is fairly straightforward: if you're using Netflix, it's up to you to pay for high-quality streams. In other words, it's not AT&T's problem. And also, AT&T just doesn't want to pay for Netflix's "good business fortune." But that much should already be crystal clear. [Image credit: Getty]
Netflix's Reed Hastings calls out weak net neutrality rules, 'reluctantly' pays ISP tolls
Reed Hastings, the CEO of Netflix has finally chimed in with his own statement about net neutrality and the deal his company struck with Comcast. As written in a blog post, the traditional standards recently overturned by a Verizon lawsuit (which prevent ISPs from restricting or meddling with data) are "important...but insufficient." As we noted when the deal happened, a peering agreement like the one Comcast and Netflix now have is not covered by existing network neutrality rules, but Hastings argues that in order for strong net neutrality to exist, it should be. While he says that in the short term Netflix is playing ball with ISPs like Comcast (and may make other, similar agreements in the future) to improve the experience for its customers, he hopes that those same companies will support "strong" net neutrality that lets Netflix connect to their networks with no fees (Open Connect). Update: Comcast has responded to Hastings' blog post with a statement of its own (available in full after the break) from EVP David Cohen. If it's planning on responding to the Netflix exec's call to support strong net neutrality, it isn't doing so yet, saying that open internet rules were never designed to deal with peering and interconnection. According to the ISP, providers like Netflix have always paid a "fair price" for their connection to the internet and see their agreement as a reflection of "the effectiveness of the market as a mechanism to deal with these matters."
Netflix reportedly reaches another Comcast-style agreement, but with a Norwegian ISP
Netflix's oddly public peering agreement to connect directly with Comcast has, as many expected, been followed closely by a similar deal. What may surprise some is that this arrangement is with Norway's Telenor and not Verizon or AT&T, although the circumstances are remarkably similar. Filter Magazine points out a report from Dagens Næringsliv (Today's Business), a Norwegian industry paper, revealing an arrangement where Netflix is apparently paying rent to place its servers loaded full of movies inside the telecommunication company's datacenter. Telenor spokesman Jørn Bremtun confirmed a commercial agreement to Filter but could not reveal details, although Netflix's OpenConnect proposal suggested a similar arrangement, without payment. Telenor has recently dropped sharply in Netflix's ISP speed index (sound familiar?), and like the Comcast announcement, this new deal is drawing scrutiny from supporters of the principles of net neutrality. Telenor is held to the standards of net neutrality as set by the Norwegian Post and Telecommunications Authority (PDF), just like Comcast is under the terms of its agreement to purchase NBC. Also just like Comcast, Telenor claims that charging Netflix is not blocked by those standards, since it isn't providing preferential treatment to any particular traffic on the network. Finn Myrstad of The Consumer Council of Norway echoes statements by US consumer rights groups and our post on the topic, pointing out that the secret nature of such deals is inherently troubling. There's still no word on any other similar agreements with US ISPs, but the trend appears to be firmly in motion.
Verizon expects to reach its own internet traffic deal with Netflix (update: AT&T too)
Many suspect that Netflix's bandwidth deal with Comcast won't be an isolated event, and it turns out that those suspicions are well-founded. Verizon chief Lowell McAdam tells CNBC that he expects a Comcast-like internet peering agreement at some stage, and that the telecom has been talking to Netflix for roughly a year about just such a thing. You have to spend a lot of money to keep the internet "vibrant," the CEO claims. The statements aren't going to assuage critics who believe that ISPs like Verizon are creating the problems by refusing to upgrade, but they do suggest that Netflix may have to keep spending cash to get the quality of service that it wants. Update: AT&T tells us that it's also negotiating a "more direct connection" with Netflix.
Netflix deal with Comcast sends its traffic -- and money -- directly to the ISP instead of middlemen
Comcast should see its ranking in Netflix's speed report begin to recover after the two reached an agreement that reportedly has the streaming giant paying the provider directly to ensure more bandwidth. The exact details of the deal are a little murky, but it's a long term contract that will have Comcast connecting to Netflix servers inside third-party data centers. The company has previously sought to have its servers placed directly inside Comcast's data centers, but the new arrangement will still reduce Netflix's dependence on middlemen like Cogent. In a statement (available after the break), both companies call it a "mutually beneficial" agreement, confirming the direct connection some users noticed late last week. Many Internet companies have similar deals with ISPs to keep their content flowing smoothly, although there's no indication if an agreement with Verizon is near for similarly-troubled FiOS connections. According to sources close to the negotiations, the negotiations have been going on for over a year, including a CES meeting between CEOs Brian Roberts and Reed Hastings where the framework came together. The same sources also indicate that Comcast declined Netflix's OpenConnect proposal because it didn't feel the solution would scale across locations, or if other services sought similar treatment. Although the connections are already up in some places, rolling it nationwide is expected to take a few weeks. While the timing is certainly suspect, the seemingly sudden resolution to the standoff has nothing to do with recent Net Neutrality developments or the proposed Time Warner acquisition. Still, the deal will certainly be used by Comcast as evidence that its merger should receive regulatory approval, even as it demonstrates the provider's growing leverage over content providers.
Netflix report suggests Comcast and Verizon FiOS speeds are slipping
Netflix's latest ISP speed report is out and compared to what we've seen before, there are a few surprises. Comcast and Verizon FiOS have dropped quite a bit in the last four months, while Google Fiber is once again at the top of the heap. Neither Comcast nor Verizon have slumped to DSL speeds, but given Comcast's history with net neutrality and Big Red's stake in Redbox, some might call their decreased data rates into question. A J.P. Morgan analyst tells Recode that Netflix's top executives don't think that the telcos are throttling their users -- reinforcing the fine print at the bottom of the report. As The Consumerist points out, last October the streaming juggernaut altered how it measures downloads, which could explain why all of the measured speeds started shifting around then. If those speeds don't match your in-home measurements, Netflix explains that the averages are well below peak speeds due to the different encodes used to pump movies and shows to your display, and can vary based on the networking gear in your house. So while the numbers may look discouraging, House of Cards will likely still look fine right where you are.
Appeals court strikes down key parts of the FCC's net neutrality rules (update: Verizon statement)
If you were hoping that the FCC's net neutrality rules would survive the many legal challenges thrown in their path, think again. A Washington, DC appeals court has voided the anti-blocking and anti-discrimination requirements in the FCC's Open Internet Order, arguing that they go beyond the agency's mandates. While the court acknowledges the potential for bad behavior following its decision, it argues that services like Google Fiber will keep incumbent carriers honest. That's an odd argument given that many of these services have a tiny footprint at best -- in many cases, big carriers enjoy duopolies and monopolies across much of the US. The move potentially lets providers like Verizon (which first appealed the rules) either block competing internet services on their landline networks, or charge those companies extra for features like guaranteed delivery or higher performance. The FCC hasn't yet responded to the decision, but we can't imagine that it's happy. If it wants net neutrality, it may now have to classify internet providers as common carriers, like wired telephone lines -- a move that would likely face stiff opposition. Update: Verizon has issued a statement arguing that it supports an open internet even with the decision in its favor. However, Big Red contradicts itself by claiming that the ruling gives customers more say over "how they access and experience the internet" -- we wouldn't count on that openness lasting forever.
Iran seemingly lifts restrictions on Facebook and Twitter access
It hasn't been outrightly confirmed by the government of Iran, but at least some within the nation's borders are now able to access both Twitter and Facebook. For those keeping score, public access to the networks has been banned since 2009, shortly after the reelection of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Iran's new president, Hassan Rouhani, seems fairly convinced that Iran itself should not be restricting its citizens to information available via social channels, and a number of trusted accounts -- including Rouhani himself along with The New York Times' Thomas Erdbrink -- have tweeted in recent hours without the use of a proxy. It's unclear whether the lift is intentional, or if it's scheduled to remain permanently, but we're obviously hoping it's a sign of meaningful change.
European Commission proposal would end some roaming fees, enshrine net neutrality
The rumors were on the mark -- as part of a larger telecom plan, the European Commission's Neelie Kroes has proposed regulation that would largely scrap roaming fees. The measure would ban all charges for incoming calls within the EU after July 1st next year, and give carriers incentives to drop many other roaming fees altogether. Companies would either have to let customers use "roam like at home" plans in EU countries or offer a choice of roaming providers with cheap rates. Outbound, mobile-to-mobile calls within member states would cost no more than €0.19 per minute. The strategy also includes rules for enforcing net neutrality across the EU. The proposal bans internet providers from blocking and throttling content. Firms could offer priority services like IPTV only as long as these features don't slow down other subscribers, who could walk away from contracts if they don't get their advertised speeds. There's no guarantee that the European Parliament will vote in favor of the new measures, but it's already clear that the Commission is far from happy with the telecom status quo. [Image credit: The Council of the European Union]
French regulator moving forward with Verizon / AT&T interconnection investigation
When you think about it, does anyone really know what's going on behind the scenes of the internet? While you're attempting to figure out how "42" is the obvious answer to that, French regulator ARCEP is moving ahead with an investigation into Verizon and AT&T. Specifically, the two have failed in an attempt to block the aforesaid entity from investigating interconnection agreements. For those unaware, these types of deals are widely viewed as being able to undermine net neutrality, and we've seen the FCC look into similar matters here in the United States. The long and short of it is as follows: with high-bandwidth services growing rapidly, ISPs far and wide are contemplating the move to extract additional revenue out of backbone providers by charging them to deliver heavy traffic to end users. It'll be interesting to see what ARCEP digs up -- something tells us the findings will be known well beyond the borders of France.
EU Commissioner teases net neutrality rules: no throttling, easy switching
The European Union has only taken baby steps toward proper net neutrality legislation so far. Today, however, the European Commission's Neelie Kroes just gave the first glimpse of what those continent-wide rules could look like. Her proposals would let companies prioritize traffic, but not block or throttle it. The measures would also prevent gotchas once customers have signed on the dotted line: internet providers would not only have to offer clear terms of service, but make it easier to jump ship for something better. There are concerns that the proposals would let providers favor their own services, but Kroes also makes no arbitrary distinctions (and thus exemptions) between wired and wireless networks, like we've seen in the US -- can we get these rules elsewhere, please? [Image credit: The Council of the European Union]
Free Press launches petition site against AT&T in the name of Net Neutrality
In the face of mounting pressure from Net Neutrality groups and threats of FCC complaints, AT&T recently unblocked use of Apple's FaceTime for some of its user base. Unfortunately, customers on unlimited data plans are still unable to use the popular chat feature over AT&T's cellular network. In response, Free Press has launched an initiative to allow customers to speak out against the practice. The site, which carries a banner boldly declaring "AT&T: Your World. Blocked," allows users to submit their name, email address and zip code to the growing list of disgruntled web denizens. At the time of this writing, the site already has more than 6,600 comments in the name of Net Neutrality.
EU stands with the US against proposed ITU internet changes: 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it'
While Russia and some African, Asian and Middle Eastern countries want to tax foreign content providers and track web-based traffic, the EU has formed a bloc with the US to kibosh any such changes. The showdown will happen at the ITU in Dubai next month, during a meeting of the 193 member countries. All 27 EU states are stolidly opposed to the changes (though many of its network providers aren't), some of which were leaked from a draft Russian document proposing more control over traffic entering its networks. Other nations like Cameroon said that Google and other content providers should pay to have their traffic routed to the nation, which it said would help pay for network expansion there. But the European Commission believes "there is no justification for such proposals," that the internet functions fine as is and "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." The EC added what others were likely thinking, namely "some countries treat this as a euphemism for controlling freedom of expression."
Sandvine: Netflix up to 29 percent of North American internet traffic, YouTube is fast on the rise
When we last checked in on one of Sandvine's traffic studies, Netflix had just edged past BitTorrent as the largest source of internet traffic in North America while YouTube was still a small-timer. A year has made quite the difference. Netflix is up to 28.8 percent in a new study, while YouTube has moved up to second place with 13.1 percent and demands even more than ordinary web requests. Rivals like Hulu don't register in the top 10, and YouTube is by far the ruler of mobile with nearly 31 percent of smartphone traffic headed its way. Overall usage is moving up rapidly, no matter what kind of network the continent uses -- the typical North American chews up 659MB per month when mobile and a hefty 51GB through a landline. There's little reason to dispute worries of the impact on bandwidth-strained internet providers, although we suspect most would disagree with Sandvine on what's to be done. The company naturally sees the study as a chance for business with carriers wanting to curb usage or charge extra through its tools; a generation that grew up with internet access, however, would likely see it as a better excuse to roll out more capacity for all those streaming videos.
Telia scraps plans to charge extra for mobile VoIP in Sweden, hikes overall rates in compensation
Telia raised hackles in March when it proposed charging Swedish subscribers extra if they wanted to use voice over IP. On top of the net neutrality issues, the proposed price premium would have been a slap in the face to Skype, the country's homegrown VoIP pioneer. While Telia's Spanish subsidiary Yoigo has no problems with such a split, Telia itself must have had a change of heart: as of now, all regular plans will continue to treat internet telephony as just another set of data packets. Only a new, ultra-basic Telia Flex Bas plan excises the option. Unfortunately, most everyone will have to pay the price for equality -- new subscriptions will have their data plans "adjusted" to compensate for increasing data use, and those paying daily will see their maximum rates jump from 9 SEK ($1.40) to 19 SEK ($2.90). As painful as the price hike might sound, however, we'd still endure it to avoid carving the mobile internet into pieces.
Google, Amazon, Facebook and more confirmed as members of the Internet Association
Pitching itself as the first trade alliance to represent the concerns of the online economy, the Internet Association lobbying group has just confirmed its member companies and policy platform. As suspected Amazon, Facebook, eBay, and Google are joined by other large tech firms, under the leadership of Capitol Hill advisor Michael Beckerman, to form the umbrella public policy organization. Citing its three main areas of focus as protecting internet freedom, fostering innovation and economic growth, and empowering users, the Internet Association will represent regulatory and political interests of its member companies, and their employees. There is no word on what the first freedom or innovation to benefit from the associations collaborative-clout will be, but while we wait to find out, you can lobby on the source link for the Mission- and Purpose-statement containing press release.
Advocacy groups notify AT&T of net neutrality complaint with the FCC over FaceTime restrictions
Public advocacy groups aren't all that impressed with AT&T's justifications for limiting FaceTime access over 3G and 4G to those who spring for its costlier Mobile Share plans. Free Press, Public Knowledge and the Open Technology Institute have served formal notice to AT&T that they plan to file a net neutrality complaint with the FCC within 10 days. It's not hard to understand why, given the groups' existing pro-neutrality stances: the Free Press' policy lead Matt Wood argues that the carrier is unfairly pushing iOS users into plans they don't need, a particularly sore point for iPad-only customers that have no AT&T phones to share. We've reached out to AT&T for comment, although we're not expecting a change from its position that allowing app use over WiFi makes its restrictions okay. As for the FCC? It's mum on the current situation. A literal reading of its net neutrality rules, however, doesn't include a WiFi exemption and might not favor AT&T when Skype video is allowed and Verizon has no problems with unrestricted access.
AT&T responds to FaceTime criticism, says you should be happy just to have apps at all
In a move that will surprise no one, AT&T released a statement regarding FaceTime on its cellular network. Apple announced FaceTime over cellular at WWDC, but AT&T this month was quick to point out that only its Mobile Share customers will be able to use Apple's video chat tool. There appears to be no restrictions on Skype, Google+, ooVoo, Yahoo Messenger, IM+, Fring, etc. Why? Because none of those apps are pre-installed on your iPhone, whereas FaceTime is. You see, after AT&T was called to the mat over net neutrality (which would mandate AT&T treat FaceTime data the same as all those other apps which will work just fine on my unlimited data plan), it cleverly pointed out that net neutrality doesn't apply because FaceTime is not only pre-installed, but is obviously "subject to some reasonable restrictions." AT&T goes even further, in my opinion. Not content to flick customers with their white glove, they add a little spit by informing us irate customers that AT&T is not legally obligated to allow your iPhone to have any preloaded apps at all. From AT&T's statement: "Indeed, the rules do not require that providers make available any preloaded apps. Rather, they address whether customers are able to download apps that compete with our voice or video telephony services." In the next paragraph they point out how lucky we all are! "Although the rules don't require it, some preloaded apps are available without charge on phones sold by AT&T, including FaceTime, but subject to some reasonable restrictions." See, we poor stupid iPhone owners are just lucky that we're even able to walk into an Apple Store and buy an AT&T phone with any apps on it at all. I mean, it's not like we have a choice in carrier these days. Can you imagine this being said while Steve Jobs was alive? Can you imagine how customers would respond if AT&T iPhones had no pre-installed apps? You can make your own joke about the efficacy of the Phone app on AT&T's network, I'll just be over here making sure no one tells them about Mobile Safari. By the way, FaceTime was downloaded after I signed up for AT&T service, although it obviously only started working once I moved from a 3GS to an iPhone 4. I'm not sure if AT&T counts this download since it was part of an OS update. Look, it's obviously what's going on here. Bean counters at AT&T decided the churn from lost customers was worth the added cost of lingering unlimited data customers like me. I've already been denied tethering (don't worry, I bought a Verizon iPad), and this is the last straw for me. AT&T clearly needs to bolster its network, and is happy to do that on the backs of clueless customers who are content to lump all their data needs together and be nickel-and-dimed over niceties like texting. As a divorced dad, my son likes to call me to chat every night he's not with me. He prefers FaceTime (he has an iPod touch), and is bummed when we have to use Skype. Now I get to tell him (after telling him FaceTime would work over cellular) that because daddy is an AT&T customer, he can't use FaceTime over cellular still. Oh wait, that won't happen because I'm switching to Verizon.
