The US FCC will vote on net neutrality on April 25th. And the director of Stanford Law School's Center on Internet and Society, who is also a law professor, said there is “a lot to celebrate” in the draft rules released earlier this month.
Carriers like T-Mobile, AT&T, and Verizon that have degraded video quality for mobile users will need to stop. The FCC has maintained state neutrality protections, such as California's net neutrality law, allowing for multiple layers of enforcement. The FCC also made it harder for ISPs to circumvent net neutrality at the point the data enters their networks.
But there are also “major problems” with the proposed rules.
The proposed rules will allow mobile ISPs to select applications and place them in the fast lane. This generally improves performance and can significantly improve performance even when the network is congested.
T-Mobile, AT&T, and Verizon are all trying to figure out how to create these 5G fast lanes for apps like video conferencing, gaming, and video, where ISPs choose and control what gets boosted. Testing. They use a technology feature in 5G called network slicing, where a portion of the wireless spectrum is used as a special lane for selected apps, separated from regular internet traffic. The FCC's draft order opens the door to these fast lanes as long as app providers are not charged a fee.
They warn about things like “mobile phone plans optimized for YouTube and TikTok.” Or we might see add-ons like enhanced video conferencing for $10 a month or a one-time 24-hour pass to prioritize online gaming.
This is not an imagination. ISPs write about this in blogs and press releases. They speak candidly about these efforts and dreams at conferences, and equipment vendors demystify how ISPs can fragment Internet service into all sorts of high-speed lanes.
This type of ISP-controlled fast lane violates core net neutrality principles, limits user choice, distorts competition, discourages startups, and solidifies platform dominance. Even small differences in load times can affect how long users spend on your site, how much they spend, and whether they come back. These differences also affect how your site ranks in search results. So by letting her ISP choose which apps go into the priority lane, her ISP, not the user, gets to pick the winners and losers online… [T]The largest apps will eventually be featured in all express lanes, and most other apps will be excluded. Those left behind include messaging apps like Signal, local news sites, decentralized Fediverse apps like Mastodon and PeerTube, niche video sites like Dropout, indie music sites like Bandcamp, and anything else in the long tail. Potentially contains millions of sites and apps.
“This is not controversial,” one subhead emphasized, adding that “even the proposed Republican net neutrality bill prohibits ISPs from speeding up or slowing down apps or “The bill's orders acknowledge that some apps may be faster, but if they violate the no-throttle rule, how will the FCC be able to speed them up?” Unclear and vague language was added suggesting that lanes be reviewed on a case-by-case basis without explaining… He is facing off against a giant telecommunications company with a large staff of lawyers and lobbyists, alleging “unfair discrimination'' that will cost him years. ”
“Net neutrality means that those of us who use the Internet can decide what we do online without interference from our ISPs. ISPs can block apps or types of apps. You cannot interfere with our choices by speeding up or slowing down.”
They told the FCC to edit the draft order by April 24, stating that “the no-throttle rule also prohibits ISPs from creating fast lanes for certain apps or types of apps.” I am asking for clarification.
