Re: "Net Neutrality: Towards a Co-Regulatory Solution"

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Richard Bennett <richard () bennett com>
Date: January 31, 2010 8:13:47 PM EST
To: dave () farber net
Cc: ip <ip () v2 listbox com>, Chris Marsden <cmars () essex ac uk>, Brett Glass <brett () lariat net>
Subject: Re: [IP] "Net Neutrality: Towards a Co-Regulatory Solution"

This is very odd. I've been reading Chris' book, as it relates to some work I'm doing on the implications of net 
neutrality regs and wireless networks, and I found it very useful. I'm not finished reading yet so there may be some 
sort of big trap at the end, but so far I find nothing offensive about the key notions, "net neutrality lite," 
"positive net neutrality", and "co-regulation". In fact they're pretty much in line with my thinking on the matter, and 
from what I know of Brett's thinking, they're aligned with it as well.  

Marsden is deeply familiar with the way the discussion has evolved in US telecom circles around the views of the 
Lessig-Wu-Berkman orbit as well as the TPRC crowd (Noam, Hazlett, Yoo, Frieden, Clark, et. al.) but he has his uniquely 
European perspective as well.  ISPs in the UK certainly have done things differently than they have in the US, and the 
European regulatory dynamic is very different from the US and Canada, in part because of the negotiation that takes 
place between the European Commission and the 28 National Regulatory Authorities.

The notion of co-regulation is particularly useful. Marsden argues for a form of industry self-regulation augmented by 
active participation on the part of the regulator, so it's not simply a form of collusion or a blank check for 
operators to do anything they want. The value of co-regulation is that it provides a means for resolving the disputes 
that arise when general principles are applied to concrete practices. It may be disadvantaging to smaller ISPs like 
Brett's because it does require participation, which costs time and money that the smaller ISP would rather spend on 
equipment and customer service, but it solve the knowledge gap between regulators and operators.  

Brett I know has issues with the mere fact that there's a move to regulate ISPs in the US in the absence of a 
compelling reason; the entire factual history of ISP offenses against the people in the US consists of 1.5 events, 
Madison River and Comcast's lack of disclosure, so there's obviously little reason to even have a discussion about how 
to regulate ISPs. But the fact remains that we are having this discussion, and whether it evolves into a debate on the 
practices of the non-ISP network operators such as Google and Akamai remains to be seen. 

I recommend the book to anyone who cares about Internet regulation and wants to learn something about how it's seen in 
Europe. Brett and Chris should both read p. 91:

"Even until recently, many analysts did not fully appreciate that so much traffic on the Internet was monetized and had 
to pay its way. Brett Glass, owner-founder of Wyoming-based ISP Lariat Networks, states that pricing and regulating 
overtly anti-competitive behaviours include ‘price squeezing, price gouging in the “middle mile” by large ISPs and 
refusal to deal by backbone owners’.14 Small ISPs regularly rehearse this complaint. The Internet is, for the most 
part, therefore not free for most traffic: all but the very largest ISPs charge for traffic to be carried over their 
networks, and this really matters."

So apparently Chris had heard of Brett Glass before today.

RB

On 1/31/2010 1:25 PM, Dave Farber wrote:
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> > From: Chris Marsden <cmars () essex ac uk>
> > Date: January 31, 2010 4:12:17 PM EST
> > To: "dave () farber net" <dave () farber net>
> > Cc: Brett Glass <brett () lariat net>, ip <ip () v2 listbox com>
> > Subject: Re: [IP] "Net Neutrality: Towards a Co-Regulatory Solution"
> >
> > Dear Dave
> >
> > I have received this email presumably via a list in the States. I had never heard of Brett Glass until this 
> > afternoon; judging by his reply he is also unfamiliar with my work.
> >
> > The book is available as a Creative Commons download, is 300 pages with a 30 page bibliography and 25 pages of 
> > notes, and I would urge those interested to view it: http://bit.ly/buQqi7
> >
> > It has received very favourable initial response from Dr Herbert Ungerer (European Commission), Dr Ian Brown 
> > (Oxford) and Professor Rob Freiden (Penn State), names familiar to those of you familiar with the international 
> > debate. It was launched at an event at McGill University in Montreal.
> >
> > A robust debate is presumably better than being ignored, though I would prefer a somewhat more temperate tone for an 
> > academic book that is not engaged with any local dispute in North America.
> >
> > There may be some confusion as to what is meant in Europe by co-regulation, perhaps I can recommend: 
> > http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1366723
> >
> > The book warns readers that this is a complex issue capable of much misinterpretation by those lobbying for one side 
> > or another, hence the book takes a middle way. I expected that to cause some excitement in those who prefer their 
> > policy to be black or white, but as with so many communications policy areas, there is much grey and should be much 
> > room for reasonable people to find middle ground. For instance, information transparency for consumers, via a 
> > process of co-regulation, is the approach adopted in Europe, including by such agencies as Ofcom in the UK. I 
> > recommend their approach: http://www.ofcom.org.uk/telecoms/ioi/copbb/copbb/
> >
> > There is much that we can teach each other over the Atlantic if we are respectful and listen to each other. I 
> > welcome constructive criticism, if that can be managed!
> >
> > Sincerely
> > Chris Marsden
> >
> > Brett Glass wrote:
> > > > http://bit.ly/dsNzX4 
> > >
> > > Dave:
> > >
> > > This book is a travesty. Like so many screeds advocating Internet regulation, it begins by falsely claiming that 
> > > broadband service is a monopoly or duopoly -- a assertion which is even now being debunked by surveys of broadband 
> > > deployment. It follows by casting false aspersions upon ISPs, claiming that we are evil and will obviously engage 
> > > in malicious blocking and filtering and have an overwhelming interest in doing so. This is especially insulting to 
> > > small, independent, and rural ISPs and WISPs like myself, who sometimes do not make a profit and certainly do not 
> > > make large ones. We do what we do because it is a mission and a calling, and yet are both condemned and attacked in 
> > > works such as this -- which call for regulations which would prevent us from continuing in business and would leave 
> > > our customers with fewer choices or take them off the Net altogether. At the same time, this work conspicuously 
> > > turns a blind eye to the much more potent "gatekeeper" roles of monopolists such as Google.
> > >
> > > The book then goes on to label everyone who does not favor onerous regulation -- which in fact would bring on the 
> > > very ills the author claims it would solve -- as a  "refusenik!"
> > >
> > > Looking at the references, footnotes, and source materials, it's easy to see that this book is yet another product 
> > > of the "network neutrality policy echo chamber" which is funded and fueled by corporate interests (notably, but not 
> > > exclusively, Google) in an attempt to institute regulation which would help those interests while harming the 
> > > public. We must look past this corporate lobbying and see the truth. See my filings and remarks at the FCC at
> > >
> > > http://www.brettglass.com/nprmcomments.pdf
> > >
> > > and
> > >
> > > http://www.brettglass.com/FCC/remarks.html
> > >
> > > and my recent talk at Harvard at
> > >
> > > http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/events/luncheon/2009/12/glass
> > >
> > > as well as my many writings elsewhere on this subject. These are the products not of a lobbying echo chamber but of 
> > > actual "boots on the ground" experience in the deployment of broadband and the operation of an ISP.
> > >
> > > --Brett Glass
> Archives      

-- 
Richard Bennett
Research Fellow
Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
Washington, DC




-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com