FCC moves forward on net neutrality plan: What now?

The FCC's chairman says he's looking for more public comment on his proposal

So what happens now that the U.S. Federal Communications Commission voted to release a net neutrality proposal and seek public comments?

The FCC vote releases a so-called notice of proposed rulemaking, or NPRM, where the agency proposes new rules and asks for public comment on them. The release of the 99-page NPRM Thursday sets off a 120-day comment period on the proposed rules, with 60 days for initial comments and 60 days for comments that respond to the first round of discussion.

Here is an FAQ about what happens next in the FCC's net neutrality proceeding:

Who can comment on the proposed rules?

Anyone who has an opinion can comment. While the FCC's proceedings are often heavy with comments from companies and trade groups affected by the proposed action, members of the general public can also comment. In the past month, people have filed more than 21,000 comments on the FCC's net neutrality proceeding.

Asked about the firestorm over his net neutrality proposal, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler said Thursday that he's encouraged by the level of public participation. "We want this kind of discussion," he said. "We want this kind of debate. It is healthy, it is good, it produces good results."

Where can I comment?

An easy way to comment is to go to the FCC's comment page, which a link to the proposal officially titled, "protecting and promoting the open Internet." Clicking on the proceeding number, 14-28, takes you to a Web form where you can leave a comment.

The FCC's email box for the proceeding is also still working. It's at openinternet@fcc.gov. The FCC's phone number is 1-888-225-5322, although the agency in recent days has encouraged people to send comments electronically instead of calling.

While anonymous comments are allowed on the FCC website, comments may be taken more seriously if you leave your name.

When does the FCC expect to pass new net neutrality rules?

FCC officials have said they hope to have new rules in place by the end of the year. Wheeler said he's pushing for the process to happen quickly because a U.S. appeals court struck down old net neutrality rules in January.

Do the rules proposed by Wheeler allow broadband providers to charge Web services for prioritized traffic?

The proposal seeks comment on whether the FCC should ban pay-for-priority business models. During Thursday's hearing, Wheeler also emphasized that he would consider any broadband provider's efforts to throttle traffic to customers to be an unreasonable and prohibited practice.

"There is one Internet," he said. "It must be fast, it must be robust and it must be open. The speed and quality of the connection a consumer purchases must be unaffected by what content he or she is using."

It's "unacceptable" for broadband providers to be gatekeepers of Web content, he added.

Wheeler, however, said an agreement earlier this year that gives Netflix faster speeds on Comcast's network is a peering arrangement not covered by net neutrality rules. The FCC is looking into complaints about peering arrangements, he said, but that issue is separate from net neutrality.

What are the prospects that the FCC will regulate broadband as a common carrier, utility-style service, as some net neutrality advocates have called for?

Wheeler said he still believes the best way to pass net neutrality rules is to follow a road map set out by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in January. The court pointed to a section of the Telecommunications Act that gives the commission authority to promote broadband deployment as the hook for passing new net neutrality rules, while some groups have called for the commission to take the bigger step and reclassify broadband under old telecom regulations.

Wheeler believes his approach would be the quicker way to restore net neutrality rules, although he also said he's open to all options. If the commission moved to reclassify broadband, it would likely face a lengthy court fight initiated by broadband providers, and a potential backlash in Congress.

Grant Gross covers technology and telecom policy in the U.S. government for The IDG News Service. Follow Grant on Twitter at GrantGross. Grant's email address is grant_gross@idg.com.

Tags telecommunicationTom WheelerregulationU.S. Federal Communications CommissioninternetgovernmentbroadbandInternet service providers

Keep up with the latest tech news, reviews and previews by subscribing to the Good Gear Guide newsletter.

Grant Gross

IDG News Service

Comments

Comments are now closed.

Most Popular Reviews

Follow Us

Best Deals on GoodGearGuide

Latest News Articles

Resources

GGG Evaluation Team

Kathy Cassidy

STYLISTIC Q702

First impression on unpacking the Q702 test unit was the solid feel and clean, minimalist styling.

Anthony Grifoni

STYLISTIC Q572

For work use, Microsoft Word and Excel programs pre-installed on the device are adequate for preparing short documents.

Steph Mundell

LIFEBOOK UH574

The Fujitsu LifeBook UH574 allowed for great mobility without being obnoxiously heavy or clunky. Its twelve hours of battery life did not disappoint.

Andrew Mitsi

STYLISTIC Q702

The screen was particularly good. It is bright and visible from most angles, however heat is an issue, particularly around the Windows button on the front, and on the back where the battery housing is located.

Simon Harriott

STYLISTIC Q702

My first impression after unboxing the Q702 is that it is a nice looking unit. Styling is somewhat minimalist but very effective. The tablet part, once detached, has a nice weight, and no buttons or switches are located in awkward or intrusive positions.

Latest Jobs

Don’t have an account? Sign up here

Don't have an account? Sign up now

Forgot password?