The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has released the final text of its net neutrality order, making changes that appear to eliminate the so-called “fast lane” for applications that some advocates feared would undermine net neutrality.
US communications regulators adopted an order last month restoring net neutrality rules overturned by the Trump administration that would reclassify internet access as a “common carrier” service under Section 2 of the Telecommunications Act and require service providers to treat all traffic equally.
But concerns have also been raised that new technologies introduced in 5G networks could create so-called “fast lanes” for some applications, allowing carriers to charge a premium for them.
In other words, carriers would be prohibited from throttling users’ connections, but could instead achieve the same effect by offering paid boosts.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) made this very point after the FCC released its proposed rules.
“While the FCC appears to think it’s wrong to favor certain sites or services by slowing down other traffic, it may be OK to favor them by allowing them access to so-called fast lanes, such as 5G network slices,” it said at the time. “If access to Spotify is faster than access to Bandcamp, it doesn’t matter whether Spotify is being made faster or Bandcamp is being slowed down, because the end result is the same.”
The final version of the order includes the following sentence: “Makes clear that when BIAS (broadband Internet access service) providers decide to increase speeds ‘based on Internet content, applications, or services,’ other content, applications, or services that do not receive the same treatment will be ‘impaired or degraded.'”
The technology that has raised these concerns is network slicing, a feature of 5G that will be enabled with the rollout of fully 5G Standalone (5G SA) networks. This can be likened to network virtualization, allowing multiple logical networks, each with different characteristics, to operate over the same infrastructure.
Some experts questioned whether network slicing would actually be used by telecommunications companies in the way that net neutrality advocates feared, but the final document seemed to reassure some that this had been avoided.
“This means that ISPs will no longer be able to offer preferential treatment to certain apps or categories of apps, such as more bandwidth, lower latency, or guaranteed quality of service,” Stanford Law Professor Barbara Van Schewick said of the new language.
Van Schewijk argues that the clarification, which replaces the vague, case-by-case standards for speed increases that were in the proposed order, would have inevitably led to drawn-out fights at the FCC over what 5G fast lanes would be allowable and would have made it harder for smaller customers to file complaints.
“There was no way to predict what types of high-speed lanes the FCC would ultimately determine violate the no-throttling rules, which would give ISPs an excuse to flood the market with different high-speed lanes, claim that their versions do not violate the no-throttling rules, and provoke the FCC into enforcing the rules,” she commented.
ISPs will be free to continue offering network slices to their enterprise customers, he said, citing as an example a self-driving car maker that might use the technology for mobile services to receive telemetry.
“The new order has clear rules prohibiting blocking, throttling and paid prioritization, ensuring that ISPs cannot use new technological capabilities to create unfair fast lanes that favor certain apps or app types,” Van Schewijk said, adding, “This is a victory for competition, innovation and free speech.”®
