Following the FCC gathering in Cambridge on Monday to conduct a hearing on network management practices, we wanted to share a great piece that ran in the Boston Globe late last year. Elaine Kamarck of Harvard University made some very important points that are worth remembering.

If you did any of those things, you are part of the new world of the Internet, a world where video is rapidly becoming the most popular thing we do online. But video takes up a lot of space, a lot more than text, and the increased use of video means that the Internet is fast filling up. The result is that if we don’t invest soon, we could be seeing, in the near future, the Internet equivalent of an early evening traffic jam on Interstate 93. It could take forever for your photos or video to download or for your e-mail to arrive.

The backbone of the Internet will need to grow. For instance, more fiber optic cable will need to be laid, and that’s not cheap. In the past the big telephone companies have laid necessary cable, and they are the ones best situated to do it again…….

It will be difficult to get phone companies to charge the prices necessary to pay for new investments in Internet infrastructure. No one can make them do so, for the Internet is not regulated. But industry will need to take into account the public interest.

We need to start thinking about a variety of options. Perhaps we should look at different pricing structures for different online activities or require the use of “smart” networks that give lower priority to entertainment-related data than to packets of data in areas like telemedicine. Many Internet activities are in the broad public interest. We need to make sure those aren’t hampered because, somewhere in the world, teenagers are playing online games or grandmas are staring at their children’s babies.

Today, the Federal Communications Commission held a hearing on broadband management at Harvard Law School. The following statement may be attributed to Mike McCurry and Christopher Wolf, co-chairs of the Hands Off the Internet coalition (HandsOff.org):

“For the typical Net user, today’s hearing is not just an academic debate about government policy. If the FCC yields to those pushing for government regulation over the Internet, the result will be higher broadband access costs, which fewer Americans will be able to afford. Our focus should be on new and faster access choices, not policies that tie this progress down in red tape and bureaucracy.”

The Hands Off the Internet coalition is a Washington, DC-based coalition of companies and nonprofit organizations that believes the Internet has flourished because government has not tried to regulate it. Members include Alcatel-Lucent, AT&T, 3M, the National Association of Manufacturers, FiberControl, and Cinergy Communications. Nonprofit members include Citizens Against Government Waste, the American Conservative Union and the National Black Chamber of Commerce.

Did you know that….

… current federal law already protects the open internet?

… federal rules against unfair competition guarantee net users’ access to the legal online content of their choice?

… states such as California have pro-consumer laws that protect net users’ access to content?

… today’s high-speed Internet routers can process 15 terabytes per second – enough to stream 15 million DVD-quality streams simultaneously?

If any of these are new to you, please read FCC comments filed by Hands Off the Internet [PDF] with the FCC. You’ll see why net neutrality is an expensive and unnecessary burden.

It’s been widely reported that Chairman Edward Markey and Rep. Charles “Chip” Pickering have introduced a bill which includes a requirement that the Federal Communications Commission study how broadband providers are coping with the exploding growth of data sent over their networks. The FCC would also have to hold eight conferences to assess broadband service competition.

We have a great respect for Chairman Markey and we’re certainly pleased that today’s bill doesn’t try to revive what Congress decisively rejected two years ago — government Internet regulation. Regarding the study specifically, there’s no question that a reasoned examination of the facts will demonstrate the folly of net neutrality. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently examined the issues that the Markey bill proposes be studied. Neither study found evidence of any problem warranting regulation. Both agencies have also clearly affirmed their ability to monitor and deal with any problems that may arise.

On its face we agree with the concept; Hands Off the Internet has always supported efforts to gather public opinion. However, we are concerned that an effort to seek public input is intended to be a stalking horse for federal Internet regulation. The continued push by special interests to regulate Internet neutrality undercuts the best hope Net users have for faster, more affordable broadband. Network innovation and deployment free from federal regulation are the keys to meet consumers’ rapidly growing bandwidth demands. More importantly efforts behind Net Neutrality regulations will create uncertainty for investors and internet service providers that must build the infrastructure to meet consumer demands.

Consumers cannot afford the cost or delays created by Net Neutrality; now is the time to clear the way for investment and innovation. Vigorous competition, not net neutrality bills and arbitrary decisions by lawyers and bureaucrats, is the best way to guarantee that open, affordable Internet.

Scott Cleland has a great one-pager on the net neutrality debate, explaining why it shouldn’t be considered a political issue. As he puts it well, it’s a “a fringe issue and a factional business dispute.” Nor is it sound policy from either a Democratic or Republican perspective. Click here to read it online in PDF format.