Log In


Reset Password
Opinion Editorial Cartoons Op-Ed Editorials Letters to the Editor

D.C. appeals court hands consumers a victory in ensuring net neutrality

On Tuesday, an appeals court upheld Federal Communications Commission rules that prohibit broadband companies from blocking or slowing web traffic to consumers from sites they choose to deny. It is a big win for internet users.

Those rules are meant to enforce what is called net neutrality. Central to that is the idea that internet access providers are akin to common carriers, which must provide the same service at the same cost to any user. A three-judge panel of the United State Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said that the FCC was within its rights to consider internet service providers utilities and regulate them as such.

Common carriers include any companies that transport people, information or goods for the public. They are regulated as utilities. FedEx or UPS can compete by setting their own rates and levels of service. But they cannot slow down or refuse packages from Land’s End because L.L. Bean paid more.

That is why this ruling is important. The big cable, telecom and wireless providers want the ability to charge companies for giving consumers faster access to their websites and downloads – which is to say, slowing or blocking access to their competitors. It borders on extortion.

The fight over net neutrality therefore pits firms such as AT&T and Verizon, which oppose it, against supporters like Google and Netflix. And from both sides’ point of view, it is as much about money as principles.

From where consumers stand, however, it is about cost, choice and the very nature of the internet. If Netflix has to pay more to stay even with Hulu, that cost will inevitably be passed on. And if the cable company can block Amazon because Walmart pays more, it is the consumer who loses.

The key is that internet providers are utilities and subject to FCC regulation. With that will likely come privacy rules as well.

Net neutrality is almost certainly headed to the Supreme Court. But this ruling is a good step, a recognition that internet access is not so much a commodity as a necessity of modern life.



Reader Comments