The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet will hold a hearing tomorrow, May 6, at 9:30 a.m to cover “H.R. 5353, the Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2008.” Witnesses will discuss the proposed legislation, which would direct the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to assess competition, consumer protection, and consumer choice issues relating to broadband Internet access services, including network neutrality. The bill was introduced by Reps. Edward Markey (D-MA), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, and Chip Pickering (R-MS).

NCTA’s Kyle McSlarrow will testify as will Mitch Bainwol of RIAA, Walter McCormick of US Telecom, and several others. Look for Kyle to make many of the same points he made in testimony before the Senate Commerce Committee on April 22, and in his post on network management here.

The efforts of broadband network providers to build larger and faster networks have helped ensure the success of countless numbers of new Internet businesses and applications. Despite concerns about alleged limited access to broadband, use of Internet video on demand has grown at the most dramatic rate. In February 2008, nearly 135 million U.S. Internet users spent an average of 204 minutes viewing 10.1 billion online videos. YouTube represented 34% of those online videos, or nearly 3.5 billion.

For years, net neutrality proponents have argued that without government intervention, broadband providers would stifle competing services and content providers; Internet development and usage would stagnate; and consumers would be unable to use their broadband connections to download video or access other emerging applications. In fact, cable’s investment in broadband has driven innovation and investment in new content and applications at the edge — the exact opposite of what was predicted by advocates of net regulation. …

Far from being “neutral,” a network that is not managed simply allows those who want to demand all the bandwidth for themselves to do so unchecked. …

Under the guise of preventing discrimination, “net neutrality” proponents would have the government determine which network management techniques are permissible. Putting every network management strategy up for debate before regulators would severely hamper the ability of network providers to ensure high-quality and reliable Internet access for their subscribers. Depriving network operators of certain bandwidth management tools only makes the network less efficient for everyone. Adept network optimization techniques are fundamental to creating and preserving the stable “ecosystem” for online service providers that ensures an optimal customer experience.

Misplaced concerns over legitimate and reasonable network management practices do not justify the enactment of open-ended regulation of the Internet, particularly where the costs of such regulation are foreseeable and substantial. Given the growth of broadband competition and the breathtaking pace of technological change, government intervention is unwarranted. As the Federal Trade Commission has warned, regulation of Internet access at this stage of market development could have “potentially adverse and unintended effects,” including reduced product and service innovation.

Congress should resist calls to interfere with broadband providers’ freedom to manage their respective networks in order to satisfy the evolving needs of American consumers. The disaster scenarios voiced by network neutrality proponents for many years have never happened. In fact, the opposite has happened — the Internet is booming without regulation. There is quite simply no problem requiring a government solution.

This entry was posted on Monday, May 5th, 2008 at 2:28 pm and is filed under NCTA Actions, Network Neutrality. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.