FCC delays decision on net neutrality

FCC chairman Julius Genachowski is seeking further comment on net neutrality

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is delaying a ruling on the future of net neutrality.

FCC chairman Julius Genachowski said in a statement that additional consultation, mirroring previous talks with network providers and interested parties, is needed as "the issues are complex, and the details matter".

In particular the FCC is looking at proposals from Google and Verizon to keep wired internet access neutral, but to allow differentiated services based on pricing for mobile access.

"Recent events have highlighted questions on how open internet rules should apply to 'specialised' services and to mobile broadband, what framework will guarantee internet freedom and openness, and maximise private investment and innovation," Genachowski said.

"Accordingly, the FCC's Wireline and Wireless Bureaus are seeking further public comment on issues related to 'specialised' (or 'managed') services and mobile broadband. The FCC will continue to be vigilant in guarding against threats to internet freedom."

The move is causing frustration among net neutrality advocates, who are worried that the FCC is dragging its feet on an important issue about which it had previously seemed so decided.

"We expect the FCC will move quickly to set the legal framework to oversee broadband internet access services, with specific rules to protect the open internet to follow soon after," said Gigi Sohn, president of non-profit group Public Knowledge.
"We note that both of the issues on which the FCC seeks public comment, dealing with specialised services and the status of wireless services in an open internet, were extensively explored in not one, but two proceedings pending at the FCC in which comments were submitted."

AT&T was quick to add its voice to the debate. In a blog post, AT&T vice president Hank Hultquist criticised what he called the "Church of Extreme Net Neutrality" (CoENN), and said that the Internet Engineering Task Force's specifications specifically allow paid prioritisation of traffic.

"One of the central dogmas of the CoENN is that quality of service on the internet, or using the preferred nomenclature of the CoENN 'paid prioritisation', is the equivalent of a deadly sin," he wrote.

"When it comes to data-driven policy making, there is no room for faith-based initiatives."