WASHINGTON, September 18, 2014 – The pro-business advocacy group Broadband for America reinforced its opposition to public utility regulation of broadband providers during a Monday teleconference on net neutrality.
Instead, the group said that they support efforts to use Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 as a separate way to enforce open internet standards. Honorary co-chair and former Rep. Sen. John Sununu, R-N.H., said that the success of the broadband industry over the last 20 years was due a light touch regulatory approach, and that the Section 706 approach would continue this trend.
Sununu said that fewer regulations on the broadband industry have helped the U.S. develop next generation broadband faster than the nations of Europe. Sununu said that the FCC protections will be allowed under section 706, and with this continued approach, the senator argued that our speeds will continue to increase over the next few years.
Broadband for America’s other honorary co-chair, former Rep. Harold Ford, Jr., D-Tenn., called “laughable” the notion that Title II public utility reclassification under the Communications Act would make it easier for new technologies to emerge. “The amazing innovation is the tech space” would be hurt by Title II reclassification, he said.
Joining in the conversation was Telecommunications Industry Association President Grant Seiffert, who represents close to 500 telecommunications equipment manufacturers and suppliers, who reiterated his group’s opposition to Title II reclassification.
“Paid peering agreements need to exist so that companies can bring to their traffic to the internet backbone in a way that is organized, disciplined and efficient,” said Seiffert.
A topic of importance to consumers and companies that has been in the media is “paid prioritization.” Sununu said that paid peering, when a company like Netflix pays to have direct connection to an ISP like Comcast, is not a net neutrality issue. Net neutrality “is about the last mile. It’s about protecting consumers from blocking access to lawful websites. It’s about making sure providers disclose how they manage traffic on their network. It’s about dealing with discrimination as well.”
- Advocates for Antitrust Enforcement Say Consumer Welfare Standard Only One Layer of Competition Law
- In Law More Than a Year, MOBILE Now Advocates Say Act Requires Further Implementation for 5G Deployment
- Broadband Roundup: Texas Reaches T-Mobile Settlement, Closing the ‘Homework Gap,’ Broadcast Ownership
- UTOPIA Fiber Announces Completion of Latest Round of Funding, a $48 Million Network Expansion
- Prakash Sangam: China’s Huawei Clones Are Greater Threat to National Security than Huawei
Signup for Broadband Breakfast
Intellectual Property4 months ago
In Congressional Oversight Hearing, Register of Copyrights Says Office Is Responding to Online Users
Broadband Data6 months ago
California Report: Income Most Significant Factor in Low Broadband Adoption
Privacy and Security3 months ago
Comparing Privacy Policies for Wearable Fitness Trackers: Apple, Fitbit, Xiaomi and Under Armour
Antitrust3 months ago
Addressing the Impact of Big Data Upon Antitrust is More Complicated Than a Big Tech Breakup
Expert Opinion5 months ago
Geoff Mulligan: A ‘Dumb’ Way to Build Smart Cities
Antitrust3 months ago
Broadband Roundup: Everyone (Almost) Gangs Up on Google, Muni Broadband Fact Sheet, SHLB Anchornet Conference
Broadband Roundup4 months ago
Cable Industry Touts Energy Efficiency, Next Century Highlights Open Access Fiber, Aspen Forum Set
Broadband's Impact5 months ago
Law Enforcement and Advocates of Facial Recognition Technologies Battle Misconceptions