Panel dumps Net neutrality
by arch stanton
Panel dumps Net neutrality
House committee drops amendment banning two-tier Internet
Verne Kopytoff, Chronicle Staff Writer
Internet carriers would have a free hand to charge the likes of Google Inc., Yahoo Inc. and eBay Inc. extra for faster delivery of services to consumers under a bill approved by a House committee Wednesday.
The vote, 42-12, brings a two-tier Internet one step closer to reality despite the wishes of a broad coalition of Web site operators and public interest groups that insist the fees will crush innovation.
The Web companies had hoped to amend Wednesday's legislation, thereby enshrining the status quo of "network neutrality," the catchphrase that has come to represent a system in which all Internet traffic is treated equally. But the effort failed when an amendment introduced by Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., was defeated 34-22 in a largely party line vote earlier in the day.
Internet carriers, including AT&T Inc., have been strident supporters of upending the Internet's tradition of network neutrality and have lobbied Congress to make it happen. They argue that Web sites, particularly those featuring video and audio that require significant bandwidth, should be able to pay extra so that users don't have to wait as long for downloads.
Internet carriers say they would use the money they earn to expand the Internet's capacity.
The possibility of separate slow and fast lanes on the Internet has galvanized many of the technology industry's biggest companies, including Google, Yahoo, eBay, Microsoft Corp. and Amazon.com Inc. Although normally rivals, they have forged a united front to oppose the bill they say will give some Web sites an unfair advantage over others and alter the Web's landscape for years to come.
Given the cold reception in the House, the Web companies are turning their efforts to the Senate, where at least one bill requiring network neutrality has been introduced and more may be coming. In a letter Wednesday to Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, they wrote that network neutrality "empowers America's citizenry, fuels our engine of innovation and is central our global leadership in Internet technology and services."
Under the bill passed by the House panel Wednesday, Internet carriers would be prohibited from blocking Web sites or degrading access to them. Violators could be fined by the Federal Communications Commission for up to $500,000.
Joe Barton, R-Tex., chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, supported the Internet carriers' right to charge Web sites extra as long as they follow basic principles such as allowing users access to all online content and making it possible for them to connect online using any device.
"If they spend billions and billions of dollars to put these networks in place under these principles, they have the right to charge a fee," he said.
Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Atherton, called the prospect of a tiered Internet anathema to the openness that has allow it to blossom during the past 10 years. Companies that will be hurt the most are startups, she said, because they will be unlikely to afford the extra fees and therefore be at a disadvantage to more-established players that can pay.
"Make no mistake about it, this will be the most profound change on the Internet if we don't have what has come to be known as network neutrality," Eshoo said in comments before Wednesday's vote on the failed network neutrality amendment, which she co-sponsored.
The network neutrality issue is part of a much larger House bill, the Communications Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement Act of 2006, that significantly rewrites telecommunications laws. Hot-button topics such as Internet telephone calls and the licensing of telephone companies to provide video over broadband lines would be affected.
The bill will next go to a vote in the full House, but it's unclear when that will happen.
*
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/04/27/BUG0QIFMHC50.DTL&type=business
Panel dumps Net neutrality
House committee drops amendment banning two-tier Internet
Verne Kopytoff, Chronicle Staff Writer
Internet carriers would have a free hand to charge the likes of Google Inc., Yahoo Inc. and eBay Inc. extra for faster delivery of services to consumers under a bill approved by a House committee Wednesday.
The vote, 42-12, brings a two-tier Internet one step closer to reality despite the wishes of a broad coalition of Web site operators and public interest groups that insist the fees will crush innovation.
The Web companies had hoped to amend Wednesday's legislation, thereby enshrining the status quo of "network neutrality," the catchphrase that has come to represent a system in which all Internet traffic is treated equally. But the effort failed when an amendment introduced by Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., was defeated 34-22 in a largely party line vote earlier in the day.
Internet carriers, including AT&T Inc., have been strident supporters of upending the Internet's tradition of network neutrality and have lobbied Congress to make it happen. They argue that Web sites, particularly those featuring video and audio that require significant bandwidth, should be able to pay extra so that users don't have to wait as long for downloads.
Internet carriers say they would use the money they earn to expand the Internet's capacity.
The possibility of separate slow and fast lanes on the Internet has galvanized many of the technology industry's biggest companies, including Google, Yahoo, eBay, Microsoft Corp. and Amazon.com Inc. Although normally rivals, they have forged a united front to oppose the bill they say will give some Web sites an unfair advantage over others and alter the Web's landscape for years to come.
Given the cold reception in the House, the Web companies are turning their efforts to the Senate, where at least one bill requiring network neutrality has been introduced and more may be coming. In a letter Wednesday to Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, they wrote that network neutrality "empowers America's citizenry, fuels our engine of innovation and is central our global leadership in Internet technology and services."
Under the bill passed by the House panel Wednesday, Internet carriers would be prohibited from blocking Web sites or degrading access to them. Violators could be fined by the Federal Communications Commission for up to $500,000.
Joe Barton, R-Tex., chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, supported the Internet carriers' right to charge Web sites extra as long as they follow basic principles such as allowing users access to all online content and making it possible for them to connect online using any device.
"If they spend billions and billions of dollars to put these networks in place under these principles, they have the right to charge a fee," he said.
Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Atherton, called the prospect of a tiered Internet anathema to the openness that has allow it to blossom during the past 10 years. Companies that will be hurt the most are startups, she said, because they will be unlikely to afford the extra fees and therefore be at a disadvantage to more-established players that can pay.
"Make no mistake about it, this will be the most profound change on the Internet if we don't have what has come to be known as network neutrality," Eshoo said in comments before Wednesday's vote on the failed network neutrality amendment, which she co-sponsored.
The network neutrality issue is part of a much larger House bill, the Communications Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement Act of 2006, that significantly rewrites telecommunications laws. Hot-button topics such as Internet telephone calls and the licensing of telephone companies to provide video over broadband lines would be affected.
The bill will next go to a vote in the full House, but it's unclear when that will happen.
*
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/04/27/BUG0QIFMHC50.DTL&type=business
posted by Alice at Friday, April 28, 2006
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home