The Internet, we can all agree, has been an unrivaled environment for free speech, democratic participation and economic innovation. But many of us are worried whether the free and open Web we’ve always had will stay that way.
Rest easy, my friends. Comcast has taken care of everything. Or so it seemed from its March 27 press release touting its talks with BitTorrent, the company that shares a name with the popular peer-to-peer file-sharing protocol. The pair announced a “collaborative effort” to address “issues associated with rich media content and network capacity management.”
Last fall, Comcast was found to be blocking BitTorrent traffic by the Associated Press. In tests — backed up by the Electronic Frontier Foundation — AP was prevented from sharing legal content, including a copy of the Bible. (Editor’s note: A follow-up AP article said Comcast acknowledged delaying, but not blocking, peer-to-peer traffic. Comcast has repeatedly denied it blocks access to any site or application.)
Comcast’s actions violate network neutrality — the fundamental Internet principle that prevents Internet service providers from discriminating against Web sites or services base on their source, ownership or destination. In response, public-interest groups, led by my organization, Free Press, filed a complaint with the Federal Communications Commission. In January, the FCC launched an investigation.
Until recently, Comcast’s defense strategy mostly consisted of denying they were blocking; admitting they were blocking but insisting it was “reasonable network management”; and claiming the FCC had no authority.
Apparently, the whole thing was just a big misunderstanding. Now that BitTorrent and Comcast are bosom buddies, they’ve “expressed the view that these technical issues can be worked out through private business discussions.”
Here’s the problem. Their arrangement doesn’t protect other peer-to-peer companies from being blocked. It also doesn’t prevent other phone and cable companies from blocking. And it doesn’t safeguard future innovative applications and services.
That’s why Nicholas Reville, whose Miro Internet TV is a fast-growing BitTorrent client, says “BitTorrent certainly does not speak for other torrent technology companies.”
FCC chairman Kevin Martin said he was pleased Comcast finally had “agreed that it is not a reasonable network management practice to arbitrarily block certain applications on its network.” But he wondered why it hadn’t said when it would stop interfering.
Martin — and everyone else — has good reason to be skeptical. It was only two years ago that Comcast vice president David Cohen went before Congress with his fingers crossed to say that any company stupid enough to “deny, delay, or degrade the Internet experience” would “suffer a serious backlash.” Then the company tested that theory.
It was barely a month ago that Comcast appeared to crowd out the public by packing an FCC hearing at Harvard about its Internet blocking with hired pawns, according to numerous press reports.
One side deal won’t save the Internet. Congress and the FCC need to outlaw Internet discrimination and blocking on all networks. The FCC has scheduled another hearing on April 17 at Stanford University. Here’s hoping that instead of trying to shut out the public, Comcast actually listens.
