WASHINGTON, December 29, 2009 – A New York University School of Law advocacy organization is heavily pushing proposed rules that would regulate internet access to support so-called Net neutrality principles.
The Institute for Policy Integrity, which describes itself as a non-partisan advocacy organization dedicated to improving the quality of governmental decisionmaking, plans to release a report next week on the “economic consequences of putting a toll on the Internet.”
The study finds that “it could have serious negative impacts - altering the face of the Web by pricing content out.”
The Federal Communications Commission said the conclusion of the public comment period on its proposed open internet rules ends on January 14. Reply comments are due on March 5.
“The free and open Internet has shaped the last decade. But now, some large Internet service providers want to create a toll system that charges content providers like newspapers, bloggers and web site owners a fee to reach broadband subscribers,” according to an IPI email.
“This month, the federal government is considering rules to put into law the current state of play. Often referred to as "net neutrality," this policy encourages a free and open Internet. But there are significant lobbying efforts to allow tolls to exist,” it reads.
IPI is currently partnering with a coalition led by Free Press and Consumers Union to support FCC efforts to “prevent internet service providers from discriminating against websites based on content.” The group states that it is “conducting research to show that this network neutrality rule is cost-benefit justified in economic terms.”
IPI, which was founded in the summer of 2008, counts former White House chief of staff, John Podesta and former Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs administrator, Sally Katzen, as advisory board members. The group was founded by Richard Revesz and Michael Livermore and has received support from the Hewlett Foundation and Rockefeller Family Fund.
While IPI supports open internet regulation, the proposed rules are controversial with numerous opponents as well.
- Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg to Tell Congress that Its Cryptocurrency Promotes Financial Inclusivity
- Social Media Both a Cause of and Solution to Epidemic of ‘Fake news,’ Say Panelists at AEI Event
- Broadband Roundup: Bill Aims to Make Social Media Interoperable, Colorado Drops T-Mobile Lawsuit, Indian Country Very Unconnected
- Africa’s Informal Sector Marred by Small Manufacturing Base and Low Technology Adoption, Brookings Experts Say
- Wireless Internet Providers Excited About Multiple Spectrum Sharing Opportunities, Including FCC Priority Access
Signup for Broadband Breakfast
Broadband Data5 months ago
Pennsylvania Broadband Speeds Worse Than Previously Believed, According to State Report
Intellectual Property3 months ago
In Congressional Oversight Hearing, Register of Copyrights Says Office Is Responding to Online Users
Broadband Data4 months ago
California Report: Income Most Significant Factor in Low Broadband Adoption
Privacy and Security2 months ago
Comparing Privacy Policies for Wearable Fitness Trackers: Apple, Fitbit, Xiaomi and Under Armour
Antitrust1 month ago
Addressing the Impact of Big Data Upon Antitrust is More Complicated Than a Big Tech Breakup
Expert Opinion3 months ago
Geoff Mulligan: A ‘Dumb’ Way to Build Smart Cities
Antitrust1 month ago
Broadband Roundup: Everyone (Almost) Gangs Up on Google, Muni Broadband Fact Sheet, SHLB Anchornet Conference
Broadband Roundup2 months ago
Cable Industry Touts Energy Efficiency, Next Century Highlights Open Access Fiber, Aspen Forum Set