feb08c.indd


Andy Bridges W a s h i n g t o n  H o t l i n e  

National cases put net neutrality in 
spotlight 
The concept of net neutrality, or the nondis­
crimination of content on the Internet, be­
came a focus of telecommunications policy 
discussions nearly two years ago. Since that 
time, the issue has been discussed more in 
concept than as reality, with many arguing 
that net neutrality is a nonissue. However, 
over the last few months, a couple of high­
profile cases have shown just how real the 
issue of net neutrality could become. 

On November 1, 2007, a coalition of 
groups led by Free Press filed a petition to 
the Federal Communications Commission 
(FCC) arguing that Comcast’s practice of de­
grading certain Internet applications—name­
ly, peer­to­peer traffic—violates FCC’s 2005 
Internet Policy Statement, which ensures 
that consumers are entitled to access to all 
Internet content. The group takes issue with 
Comcast’s claim that it was merely engag­
ing in “reasonable network management,” a 
clause outlined in a footnote to the Internet 
Policy Statement. 

In response, FCC released two public 
notices seeking comment on the situation: 1) 
FCC is looking to make a declaratory ruling 
on whether or not the practice of degrad­
ing peer­to­peer violates the Internet Policy 
Statement, and 2) FCC would like to clarify 
the meaning of the phrase “reasonable net­
work management.” 

More information is available at both 
www.freepress.net and www.fcc.gov. 

Also making the news recently, NARAL 
Pro­Choice America, an abortion rights 
group, tried to offer its members a new 
way to keep in touch with the organization: 
text messaging. However, Verizon turned 
down the group’s request for a fi ve­digit 
“short code,” which members would use 
to get updates, seemingly violating one of 
the principles of net neutrality: that Internet 
providers not favor or block any content. 
Verizon claims that its system is closed to 

Andy Bridges is communications director at ALA’s 
Washington Offi  ce, e-mail: abridges@alawash.org 

groups whose content “may be seen as con­
troversial or unsavory to any of our users.” 
Verizon later reversed this decision. 

FCC also put out a public notice on this 
issue, seeking comment to “clarify the regu­
latory status of text messaging services, in­
cluding short­code based services sent from 
and received by mobiles phones . . .” 

Background 
Net neutrality (also often called network 
neutrality) is at its heart a concept of online 
nondiscrimination. It is the principle that 
consumers should be free to get access to 
(or to provide) the Internet content and 
services they wish, and that access should 
not be regulated based on the source of that 
content or service, or, to the extent possible, 
on the basis of the kind of service being 
provided. Information providers—which 
may be Web sites, online services, etc., 
and who may be affiliated with traditional 
commercial enterprises but who also may 
be individual citizens, libraries, schools, or 
nonprofit entities—should have essentially 
the same quality of access to distribute their 
offerings. “Pipe” owners (carriers) should 
not be allowed to charge the same kinds of 
information providers more money for the 
same pipes, or establish exclusive deals that 
relegate everyone else (including small non­
commercial or startup entities) to an Internet 
“slow lane.” This principle should hold true 
even when a broadband provider is provid­
ing Internet carriage to a competitor. 

Congress, as part of its recent efforts to 
reform telecommunications law, is weighing 
both sides of the net neutrality debate as 
they consider various forms of net neutrality 
legislation. Both sides of this debate have 
expressed valid concerns. On the one hand, 
it is critical for the growth of the Internet 
that a robust, competitive market for Internet 
carriage and services be encouraged, with 
regulation kept at a minimum. At the same 
time, net neutrality, properly understood, is 
a fundamental principle of the Internet that 
has permitted it to become a critical informa­
tion and communication resource for librar­
ies, their missions, and their patrons. 

February 2008  103 C&RL News 

mailto:abridges@alawash.org
http:www.fcc.gov
http:www.freepress.net