AT&T, Verizon opposed; T-Mobile US cautious; Sprint in favor of net neutrality decision
This week’s decision by the Federal Communications Commission to expand Title II regulatory authority over broadband services was greeted by cheers from dozens of people who attended the FCC meeting in person – and likely millions around the country, but garnered mixed reactions from telecom operators.
As expected, Verizon Communications and AT&T came out pointedly opposed to the FCC decision, which was expected as both telecom giants had been against a Title II reclassification from the beginning. Verizon made the biggest “scene” in its opposition, releasing a statement on its policy blog entitled “FCC’s ‘throwback Thursday’ move imposes 1930s rules on the Internet.” That title was followed by a statement written in Morse Code, with a link at the bottom to an English translation.
“The FCC … chose to change the way the commercial Internet has operated since its creation,” the “translation” stated. “Changing a platform that has been so successful should be done, if at all, only after careful policy analysis, full transparency, and by the legislature, which is constitutionally charged with determining policy. As a result, it is likely that history will judge today’s actions as misguided.”
Verizon was at the center of the latest FCC move as its court case against how the FCC was able to regulate some agreements led to the overturning of the previous Open Internet provision established in 2010 by then FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski.
AT&T expressed similar disdain for the FCC’s latest move, bringing up the expected partisan fight that most predict will be waged in Congress, not to mention the expected court challenges.
“Instead of a clear set of rules moving forward, with a broad set of agreement behind them, we once again face the uncertainty of litigation, and the very real potential of having to start over – again – in the future,” explained Jim Cicconi, SEVP for external and legislative affairs at AT&T. “Partisan decisions taken on 3-2 votes can be undone on similarly partisan 3-2 votes only two years hence. And FCC decisions made without clear authorization by Congress (and who can honestly argue Congress intended this?) can be undone quickly by Congress or the courts. This may suit partisans who lust for issues of political division, but it isn’t healthy for the Internet ecosystem, for the economy, or for our political system. And, followed to its logical conclusion, this will do long-term damage to the FCC as well.”
T-Mobile US expressed a cautiously optimistic view on the subject, with CEO John Legere touting the carrier’s self-described “pro-consumer” actions.
“As the consumer advocate, we have always believed in competition and in a free, open Internet with rules that protect net neutrality – no blocking, no discrimination and transparency,” Legere said. “I am hopeful that the FCC’s new rules will let us continue to offer innovative services to consumers in our typical uncarrier fashion, but obviously we need to read through all of the details.”
Sprint came in with full support for the FCC action, something the carrier had expressed leading up to the final vote, which FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler noted several times during the FCC meeting.
“Sprint has been a leader in supporting an open Internet and commends the FCC for its hard work in arriving at a thoughtful, measured approach on this important issue,” the carrier stated. “We believe balanced net neutrality rules with a light regulatory touch will benefit consumers while fostering mobile broadband competition, investment and innovation in the United States. We look forward to reviewing the FCC order and continuing to work with policymakers to ensure consumers benefit from an open Internet.”
That review of the order is the next step for all involved as the FCC has so far not publicly released the complete contents of its ruling. Instead, the FCC has only released snippets of what the ruling entails, which, depending on the details of the full announcement, could have significant repercussions on how mobile networks are managed.
The biggest impact could be felt in the move to bring mobile broadband services, both Wi-Fi and cellular, under the Title II designation. The FCC had previously regarded at least cellular services as separate from fixed broadband services owing to the limited spectrum capacity available to mobile operators as well as the limited use of mobile connectivity by consumers in accessing the Internet. However, with mobile access now accounting for more than half of Internet connections, the FCC looks set to take a harder look at how that access is managed.
“While the FCC’s 2010 Open Internet rules had limited applicability to mobile broadband, the new rules – in their entirety – would apply to fixed and mobile broadband alike, recognizing advances in technology and the growing significance of wireless broadband access in recent years (while recognizing the importance of reasonable network management and its specific application to mobile and unlicensed Wi-Fi networks),” the FCC statement read. “The order protects consumers no matter how they access the Internet, whether on a desktop computer or a mobile device.”
The statement’s inclusion of “reasonable network management” is likely to be a major point of discussion for mobile operators. While the market has more wireless spectrum than ever, consumers are putting an increasing demand on mobile broadband connections that has put those spectrum assets and corresponding network technologies to the test.
The FCC provided a bit more color on the management issue, explaining:
“However, the network practice must be primarily used for and tailored to achieving a legitimate network management – and not business – purpose,” the FCC stated. “For example, a provider can’t cite reasonable network management to justify reneging on its promise to supply a customer with ‘unlimited’ data.”
That unlimited data argument is being played out in a tussle between AT&T and the Federal Trade Commission, which last year filed a court complaint against AT&T Mobility over the mobile operator’s throttling of data speeds for “unlimited” data customers. The court action, which was coordinated with the FCC, alleges “unfair and deceptive” practices tied to the unlimited data claim.
The complaint, filed in a San Francisco federal court, alleges that AT&T Mobility did not adequately inform customers on unlimited data plans that they would have their data speeds reduced once they reached a certain amount of data used. The FTC notes that AT&T Mobility’s move in 2011 to begin throttling the data speeds for unlimited data customers once they hit 2 gigabytes of usage per month, “often resulting in speed reductions of 80% to 90% for affected users.” The FTC claims such practices have impacted at least 3.5 million unique customers a total of more than 25 million times.
Bored? Why not follow me on Twitter
