Biggest Network Neutrality boosters question FCC proposal

The strength or weakness of a proposed open Internet rule, known as network neutrality, could rest in the interpretation of just one word: "reasonable." The way that word is defined can tilt fortunes in the Web economy and set the course for how consumers use the Web today and in the future, proponents of the policy say. Now, a group of law professors and public interest groups are telling the Federal Communications Commission that its proposed rules don't sufficiently define what that word means for Internet service providers like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon as they management traffic on their networks. In a letter to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski sent this morning, the legal scholars -- all long-time proponents of net neutrality -- are asking the agency to clear up ambiguity on "reasonable network management" practices in a draft of rules. "We submit this extraordinary early letter only to flag what we believe are two ambiguities in the Notice that we hope can be addressed early to provide a clearer foundation for comments," wrote Tim Wu, a law professor at Columbia University and chairman of public interest group Free Press, Stanford University Law professors Larry Lessig and Barbara van Shewick; Yale Law School's Jack Balkin; South Texas College of Law Professor John Blevins; and University of Louisville School of Law's Jim Chen. "We trust Genachowski," said Wu. "But this is a historic rule and this letter was in the spirit of looking at other FCCs and creating a stronger rule that sets a policy that lasts longer as opposed to something that is highly dependent on the whims of a commission in power."