Advocates of the latest legislation aimed at preventing Internet service providers from limiting consumers’ access to Web content are buoyed by such influential allies as Google and Amazon.

But they also worry that the giant technology companies aren’t prepared to spend the kind of money on lobbying that it will take to pass the so-called “Net neutrality” legislation.

The reason for their fear: The big telephone and cable companies that oppose the measure are willing to spend heavily on the issue. They can make a few calls and have an army of lobbyists ready to battle Net neutrality.

Tech companies, relative newcomers to the game and reluctant to spend, still rely largely on their cool-kid cachet to sell their arguments, said a longtime adviser to the Net neutrality campaign.

“The other side has been showing up and lining pockets for years,” the lobbyist said. They “don’t win by accident. They don’t win because the facts are on their side. They see it as a marathon and not a sprint, and they invest.”

Google spokesman Adam Kovacevich said the company has “made a significant investment of time and resources to press for Net neutrality” but declined to say how much money Google has spent on the issue.

Also working against supporters is the legislative calendar. They admit that getting the bill passed in this election year is difficult, especially when it involves big-money interests like the telecom industry, with ready campaign contributions.

“It’s hard to pass one of those bills when those big guys are dumping money into their campaign coffers,” a telecom lobbyist said.

But part of any good lobbying campaign is preparation, and Net neutrality supporters see this year as a chance to gather co-sponsors, hold hearings and lay the groundwork for what insiders expect will be a showdown next year before a new Congress and administration.

It’s a long-term strategy that they believe has served them well so far. In their first showdown in 2006, they argued that the telephone and cable companies would police content. Now they claim to have evidence of it — proof that the communication companies dispute.

As part of the new effort, the SavetheInternet.com Coalition has e-mailed more than 400,000 of its 1 million members, urging them to contact their lawmakers to rally support for the legislation, said Ben Scott, policy director of the consumer advocacy group Free Press, a coalition member.

The coalition is working to land 100 co-sponsors to the bill offered by Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), chairman of the House Internet subcommittee.

Some telecom industry players are downplaying the bill’s chances of passage this year and are not yet gearing up for a fight on the scale of two years ago. Some view the legislation as a tactical move designed to keep the issue alive because of the prospect of a new Democratic president.

Verizon, AT&T and Comcast wouldn’t discuss their internal lobbying efforts. But Verizon and AT&T officials do assert that the legislation amounts to regulation of the Internet.

“It would enact a new broadband policy for the United States that would include unprecedented regulation of the Internet,” AT&T said in a statement. “This bill will jeopardize billions in badly needed Internet investment and stifle broadband deployment, … [and it] sets the stage for regulating the Internet and the operations of all private broadband networks in the U.S.”

The Federal Communications Commission already has effectively dealt with the problems that have surfaced, said Christopher Wolf, co-chairman of Hands Off the Internet, a coalition committed to the unregulated growth of the Internet. The group is not doing any lobbying, he said.

Net neutrality opponents say the FCC’s oversight is enough regulation and point to the agency’s handling of a Free Press complaint against Comcast as proof that the system works. The consumer group argued in its complaint that the cable giant is using discriminatory network management practices against a competing online video provider.

Scott calls the Comcast controversy his cause’s “told-you-so moment,” because it demonstrates a network provider controlling content. He said Comcast has slowed down a competitor’s video-sharing technology to the point where it doesn’t work. The cable operator, he said, is working to control the Web’s content.

Comcast said it isn’t being anti-competitive. It’s simply trying to keep its network fast for as many customers as possible by slowing down the video-sharing software that is causing congestion, said spokeswoman Sena Fitzmaurice.

Supporters of the Net neutrality bill hope that it puts the FCC on notice that Congress favors openness and that it sends a signal to Wall Street that investment in discriminatory network technologies are a bad bet because they will soon be illegal, Scott said.

The battle, though, is no longer just between tech companies, public interest groups and network providers. The powerful companies that create music, video and other content will be part of the next-generation Net neutrality debate.

“The stakes are even higher than they were two years ago, because these guys [network providers] are the de facto gatekeepers. And as the Internet explodes, what’s driving that is content,” said Maura Corbett, a veteran of the 2006 Net neutrality fight. “The questions are beyond Net neutrality now. They have bled into the copyright debate. … Net neutrality is growing up.”

By: Chris Frates
February 18, 2008