Net neutrality rules 'turning point' in ongoing debate

New network neutrality rules adopted by the Federal Communications Commission are more likely to be a turning point in the ongoing policy debate, rather than an endpoint, noted research firm Medley Global Advisors L.L.C.
Reaction to new network neutrality rules is mixed. Broadband provider groups are satisfied the FCC did not push the Title II common carrier option and stayed with a light regulatory touch on wireless carriers, but many are skeptical that the new rules will not withstand an expected court challenge.
“We regard the decision more of turning point than an endpoint on net neutrality policy, given questions about the ruling’s legal sustainability as well as unpredictable outcomes associated with FCC enforcement and net neutrality definitional disputes that are likely to arise,” Medley Global said in a research note. The firm said it doubts Republicans will be able to overturn net neutrality regulations, but could vent their anger over the new rules in the implementation of President Obama’s National Broadband Plan.
The details of the order have yet to be released and definitions around phrases like “reasonable network management” will mean different things to various service providers, which means the order will be challenged one way or another.
Nevertheless, a quick look around at wireless industry trade groups found they were OK with the order.
— The Mobile Future coalition, a group that includes AT&T Inc. (T), T-Mobile USA Inc. (DTEGY) and Qualcomm Inc., (QCOM) said it will “review the fine print closely in the coming days to ensure the commission has ‘walked its talk’ in structuring a compromise that will ensure a measured, forward-looking policy framework that recognizes the dynamic nature of the wireless ecosystem and the importance of maintaining an environment that fosters investment, job creation and innovation in the communications sector.”
— CTIA said it still believes no regulations are needed, but that it appreciates “that the commission’s action … appears to recognize the important differences between fixed and mobile broadband. Whether it is the competition within the industry, the technical characteristics of the service or the distinct deregulatory framework adopted by Congress under which wireless currently operates, wireless is different.”
— The Internet Innovation Alliance likewise said it appreciates the compromise that could preserve both private-sector investment and open Internet principles.
— The Information and Technology Foundation said it supports the Open Internet framework. “The order brings an especially dramatic chapter in the Internet’s story to a successful close and benefits the Internet economy. While the framework is not everything that we would have liked, it nevertheless represents progress.”
— The Telecommunications Industry Association said it supports the FCC’s “restraint in its decision to refrain from moving forward with a Title II approach in its Open Internet Order.”
— But not everyone was pleased. Americans for Prosperity’s VP of Policy Phil Kerpen said: “The FCC has fittingly chosen the darkest day in 372 years to impose potentially devastating regulations on the up-to-now free-market Internet. As the moon was eclipsed earlier today, Congress and the American people will be eclipsed by this regulatory coup d’