The Web Difference

In anticipation of the FCC hearing on Monday, I want to draw everybody’s attention to some of the prior authority on ISP prioritization. In In the Matter of Madison River Communications (20 F.C.C. Rcd 4295 (2005)), the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau investigated Madison River Communications for allegedly blocking ports used for VOIP applications. The practice hampered subscribers’ ability to use certain VOIP services, much like Comcast’s de-prioritization of p2p services has limited subscribers’ ability to use those services. The FCC believed that Madison River’s practice violated section 201(B) of the Communications Act of 1934. Madison River ultimately agreed to a Consent Decree, which prohibited the blocking of ports used for VOIP applications. It also barred Madison River from “otherwise prevent[ing] customers from using VOIP applications.” Also in 2005, the FCC issued a Policy Statement that most people interpret to endorse Network Neutrality  http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/at…). It included four Internet Principles, all of which were intended to “preserve and promote the open and interconnected nature of the Internet.” Madison River and the FCC Policy Statement seem to prevent filtering based on the type of transmission and is consequently encouraging for anyone who thinks p2p services offer legitimate legal functions and should be widely available to Internet users.

This work, unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.