Cable Companies: Google Threatens Net Neutrality, Not Us

Internet service providers are urging the FCC to regulate popular websites.

A sign is posted on the exterior of Google headquarters on January 30, 2014 in Mountain View, California.  
National Journal
Brendan Sasso
July 25, 2014, 1 a.m.

The real threat to on­line free­dom is from In­ter­net gi­ants like Google and Net­flix, ac­cord­ing to ma­jor cable com­pan­ies.

Those sites could block ac­cess to pop­u­lar con­tent and ex­tort tolls out of In­ter­net ser­vice pro­viders, the cable com­pan­ies warn.

The ar­gu­ment is the back­ward ver­sion of the usu­al fight over net neut­ral­ity.

There is in­tense pub­lic pres­sure on the Fed­er­al Com­mu­nic­a­tions Com­mis­sion to en­act net-neut­ral­ity reg­u­la­tions that pre­vent broad­band pro­viders from block­ing web­sites or ma­nip­u­lat­ing In­ter­net traffic. Con­sumer ad­vocacy groups and the ma­jor In­ter­net com­pan­ies warn that be­cause broad­band pro­viders like Com­cast con­trol their cus­tom­ers’ ac­cess to the en­tire In­ter­net, they have tre­mend­ous power to dis­tort the In­ter­net for their own pur­poses.

But in a fil­ing to the FCC, Time Warner Cable claimed that the con­tro­versy over In­ter­net pro­viders po­ten­tially char­ging web­sites for ac­cess to spe­cial “fast lanes” is a “red her­ring.” The real danger, the cable com­pany claimed, is that Google or Net­flix could de­mand pay­ments from In­ter­net pro­viders. Cus­tom­ers ex­pect ac­cess to the most pop­u­lar web­sites, and an In­ter­net pro­vider may have little choice but to pay up.

The Na­tion­al Cable and Tele­com­mu­nic­a­tions As­so­ci­ation, which rep­res­ents all the ma­jor cable com­pan­ies, wrote that “a re­l­at­ively con­cen­trated group of large [Web com­pan­ies]””such as Google, Net­flix, Mi­crosoft, Apple, Amazon, and Face­book””have enorm­ous and grow­ing power over con­sumers’ abil­ity to ac­cess the con­tent of their choice on the In­ter­net.”

The group ar­gued that Google, which handles about 68 per­cent of all In­ter­net searches, has far more con­trol over ac­cess to oth­er sites than any in­di­vidu­al broad­band pro­vider does.

“It makes no sense to fo­cus ex­clus­ively on In­ter­net ac­cess pro­viders and ig­nore con­duct by [web­sites] that threatens sim­il­ar harms,” the cable lob­by­ing group wrote.

The threat of be­ing charged for ac­cess to web­sites is a par­tic­u­lar fo­cus for the Amer­ic­an Cable As­so­ci­ation, which rep­res­ents small cable com­pan­ies. In its fil­ing, the group warned the FCC that “leav­ing oth­er In­ter­net act­ors free to block or dis­crim­in­ate” would “un­der­mine the rules’ goals and ef­fect­ive­ness.”

It’s not that crazy an idea that web­sites might charge broad­band pro­viders for ac­cess to their con­tent. After all, cable com­pan­ies pay for the right to carry TV chan­nels.

But dur­ing Net­flix’s quarterly earn­ings call this week, CEO Reed Hast­ings dis­missed the idea of de­mand­ing money for the “priv­ilege” of car­ry­ing Net­flix data.

“I think the In­ter­net really has this dif­fer­ent, much more open, ar­chi­tec­ture than clas­sic cable,” Hast­ings said. “What you get is this open, vi­brant sys­tem that the In­ter­net has been so fam­ous for. And that’s really the tra­di­tion that we grew up in, and that we’re try­ing to see carry for­ward.”

It’s un­likely the FCC would ex­tend its net-neut­ral­ity reg­u­la­tions to web­sites like Net­flix. In its pro­pos­al, the FCC said that while “oth­er forms of dis­crim­in­a­tion in the In­ter­net eco­sys­tem may ex­ist “¦ such con­duct is bey­ond the scope of this pro­ceed­ing.”

The ar­gu­ment comes at a time when In­ter­net reg­u­la­tion is up for grabs: A fed­er­al court struck down the FCC’s old net-neut­ral­ity rules earli­er this year, and FCC Chair­man Tom Wheel­er is now try­ing to re­work the rules in a way that can sur­vive fu­ture court chal­lenges. His pro­pos­al has sparked a massive back­lash be­cause it would al­low broad­band pro­viders to charge web­sites for faster ser­vice as long as the agree­ments are “com­mer­cially reas­on­able.”

{{ BIZOBJ (video: 4950) }}

Mi­chael Wein­berg, vice pres­id­ent of the con­sumer ad­vocacy group Pub­lic Know­ledge, said net neut­ral­ity is really about pre­vent­ing In­ter­net ser­vice pro­viders from ab­us­ing their power as “gate­keep­ers” of all In­ter­net con­tent. Net­flix might be a gate­keep­er for ac­cess to House of Cards, but that’s an en­tirely dif­fer­ent prob­lem, he said.

But if the FCC al­lows net neut­ral­ity to die, it’s pos­sible that the In­ter­net could be­gin to re­semble cable TV, Wein­berg said.

“The Net­flixes and Googles of the world may have to pay to get on Com­cast, Ve­r­i­zon, and AT&T,” he pre­dicted. “One way that they might make up that money is to charge small or rur­al ISPs high rates to ac­cess Google and Net­flix.”

But, for now, the FCC should fo­cus on en­act­ing strong net-neut­ral­ity rules that pre­vent ab­uses by In­ter­net ser­vice pro­viders, Wein­berg said.

There have been ex­amples of web­sites block­ing ac­cess to con­tent for sub­scribers of par­tic­u­lar In­ter­net pro­viders. But the cul­prits wer­en’t Google or Net­flix””they were me­dia com­pan­ies that pulled on­line videos as part of con­tract dis­putes with cable pro­viders.

Last year, for ex­ample, CBS blocked its on­line videos for Time Warner Cable sub­scribers after the com­pan­ies were un­able to reach an agree­ment on car­ry­ing CBS TV sta­tions. The tac­tic en­sured that cus­tom­ers couldn’t just watch their fa­vor­ite shows on­line for free while the ac­tu­al chan­nel was blacked out.

Wein­berg said the on­line black­outs are troub­ling, but they are a symp­tom of a “broken” TV reg­u­lat­ory re­gime, not evid­ence that net-neut­ral­ity reg­u­la­tions should cov­er web­sites.

What We're Following See More »
GOP Budget Chiefs Won’t Invite Administration to Testify
1 days ago

The administration will release its 2017 budget blueprint tomorrow, but the House and Senate budget committees won’t be inviting anyone from the White House to come talk about it. “The chairmen of the House and Senate Budget committees released a joint statement saying it simply wasn’t worth their time” to hear from OMB Director Shaun Donovan. Accusing the members of pulling a “Donald Trump,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said the move “raises some questions about how confident they are about the kinds of arguments that they could make.”

Snowstorm Could Impact Primary Turnout
1 days ago

A snowstorm is supposed to hit New Hampshire today and “linger into Primary Tuesday.” GOP consultant Ron Kaufman said lower turnout should help candidates who have spent a lot of time in the state tending to retail politicking. Donald Trump “has acknowledged that he needs to step up his ground-game, and a heavy snowfall could depress his figures relative to more organized candidates.”

A Shake-Up in the Offing in the Clinton Camp?
1 days ago

Anticipating a primary loss in New Hampshire on Tuesday, Hillary and Bill Clinton “are considering staffing and strategy changes” to their campaign. Sources tell Politico that the Clintons are likely to layer over top officials with experienced talent, rather than fire their staff en masse.

Trump Is Still Ahead, but Who’s in Second?
18 hours ago

We may not be talking about New Hampshire primary polls for another three-and-a-half years, so here goes:

  • American Research Group’s tracking poll has Donald Trump in the lead with 30% support, followed by Marco Rubio and John Kasich tying for second place at 16%. On the Democratic side, Bernie Sanders leads Hillary Clinton 53%-41%.
  • The 7 News/UMass Lowell tracking poll has Trump way out front with 34%, followed by Rubio and Ted Cruz with 13% apiece. Among the Democrats, Sanders is in front 56%-40%.
  • A Gravis poll puts Trump ahead with 28%, followed by Kasich with 17% and Rubio with 15%.
CNN Calls the Primary for Sanders and Trump
5 hours ago

Well that didn’t take long. CNN has already declared Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump the winners of the New Hampshire primary, leaving the rest of the candidates to fight for the scraps. Five minutes later, the Associated Press echoed CNN’s call.