Congress Double Dealing On Net Neutrality Issue

At this point in all the stimulus bill talk, if I made the statement that there is something in the package that appears to be two-faced and underhanded you would probably just tell me to get in line, you have already heard it.? Well surprise!? There’s something two-faced and underhanded in the stimulus, and I’m jumping in line.

Yesterday, Public Knowledge sent out an Action Alert concerning an amendment to the broadband portion of the stimulus package focused on allowing network management for child porn and copyrighted material.? (Julian Sanchez also has a nice break down of the particulars at Ars Technica).

AMENDMENT intended to be proposed by Mrs. FEINSTEIN to the amendment (No. 98) proposed by Mr. INOUYE (for himself and Mr. BAUCUS)
Viz: On page 56, between lines 23 and 24, insert the following: (11) In establishing obligations under paragraph (8), the Assistant Secretary shall allow for reasonable network management practices such as deterring unlawful activity, including child pornography and copyright infringement.

Take a step back back to my original concern about net neutrality (as defined by the FCC) being enforced and regulated on any network built with funds from the stimulus plan.? That concern actually is basis for what I perceive to be a larger threat, which is the enforcement of net neutrality to other non-stimulus funded networks down the road.? Essentially proponents would be using stimulus built networks as a gateway to full network wide implementation of net neutrality.

But here, we don’t even need to go that far.? I’m just looking at the enforcement of net neutrality on stimulus built networks.? This, along with this network amendment is guaranteed to happen if the House and Senate compromises that are expected to take place in conference go through.

Now for the double speak.? The Fed is telling everyone that they want net neutrality… Unless…? Well, unless it just doesn’t completely benefit them.? So all packets on government stimulus built networks will be treated equally unless they contain child porn on copyrighted material.? Hmmm.? Well how do we know they are containing that material?? The network managers will have to violate neutrality and inspect packet layers, then additionally if they discover child porn or copyrighted material then they will be free to “manage” that content.? Which if my bullcrap detector is fully functioning, just means they will drop the packets.? This is not to even mention the fact that it also gives network managers the opportunity to drop or block packet transfer for completely legal uses of copyrighted material being that they can’t determine what the use of that material is for by simply examining the packet contents.

So what have we learned here?? Once again when regulators create rules, they only create them to be self serving, and beneficial to those they for whom they are alligned.? This is not net neutrality, this is Internet regulation where convienent.

-nick

p.s. Please don’t send me email about child porn.? This is obviously not a statement condoning that dispicable act.? The point far exceeds that particular subject line.

Update: The final bill was released and the admendment was not added back into the bill during Conference.? I guess one could say “we got lucky” but the result of the actual broadband stimulus and it’s enforcement of network neutrality on grantees is really not that great…