Better Prospects Ahead for Net Neutrality? - Page 2

Page 2 of 2

But Lipscomb and others argue against the term, warning that it has gotten so bogged down as a cause célèbre among activist groups and Web firms that it actually undermines the primary goal they are trying to achieve.

"Net neutrality is dangerous in so far as it can cut off badly needed capital to build out the broadband backbone," he said. "I would argue that true Net neutrality is fully disclosed pricing for service that has to compete for consumers. There is no discrimination anywhere there and let the markets settle out what its consumers require competitively.

He added, "There are always too few competitors in the early stages. But if there is money to be made, competition won't take long to impact the market."

More religion than substance?

Lawrence Spiwak, a former FCC counsel and the president of the Phoenix Center, a Washington think tank, shares Lipscomb's concern that overzealous legislation may be problematic. For instance, it could hamstring the ability of ISPs to manage their own pricing structures, an unnecessary distraction that could divert efforts toward the most important objective.

"Putting aside the Net neutrality issue, everyone wants more broadband deployment, and people want more broadband adoption," Spiwak told InternetNews.com. Net neutrality "unfortunately has become more of religion than substance."

Part of the confusion stems from the evolution of the term's meaning. Originally, the debate focused on efforts to block broadband providers from charging a higher fee for more bandwidth. The less extreme version would seek to codify the requirement that ISPs do not single out and block any specific types of traffic, such as a competitor's service.

To Lipscomb, that distinction has become dangerously blurred.

"Multiple pricing -- to the true-blue Net neutrality guys -- is discriminatory traffic," he said.

But Snowe's aide explained that the bill would be reconstituted in such a way as to ensure that providers retain the flexibility to adopt a tiered pricing model, charging a higher fee for more bandwidth, which would make it more palatable to Republican opposition.

A structural change in the Senate could help the bill's chance, too. Dorgan is already one of the more senior members of the Senate Commerce Committee, and there is a rumor in Washington that the new session might see the revival of the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, which was abolished when Ted Stevens, the Alaska Republican recently convicted of Senate ethics violations, chaired the full committee.

Stevens was up for reelection this year in a tight race where election officials are still counting ballots, but the most recent tally indicates that he will likely lose his seat to the Democratic challenger.

The commitment of Dorgan and Snowe, coupled with the president-elect's enthusiasm for the issue, gives Ammori and his group hope that they will score a victory in this Congress.

Everyone expects there to be some movement on this bill," Ammori told InternetNews.com. "It seems like this would be the year. This is the best opportunity of the last several years."