Net Neutrality: the Plum report on the Open Internet
Post categories: Internet Protocol,Ìýopen standards,Ìýstakeholders
| 15:00 UK time, Wednesday, 5 October 2011
As part of the ongoing debate about traffic management (or 'net neutrality' as it is sometimes referred to), I have been leading the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú's discussions with Government and regulators about the subject.
The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú strongly believes that the open internet needs to be safeguarded to ensure consumers can access all the internet content and services of their choice. We're not opposed to premium internet services if consumers want to pay extra, but it's critical that no matter how many fast lanes there are, the 'best efforts' open internet should itself provide a very good, and consistently and fairly delivered, service.
Along with some other internet content and service providers, we commissioned a study which has now been published. The report considers some of the telcos' main arguments for introducing more traffic management - including that their costs are ballooning due to traffic growth; that content providers 'free ride' on networks; and that introducing charges for content providers is necessary to help investment in superfast broadband.
challenges these arguments and says that, in practice, great content from providers such as the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú drives demand for broadband connectivity, which in turn has driven fixed and mobile broadband revenues of approximately €155 billion in Europe in 2010.
The report responds to for industry to develop some 'rules of the road' to build on the existing transparency work by ISPs. It does not call for additional regulation at this stage but this clearly remains an option if a self-regulatory approach fails.
We support Plum's analysis and recommendations, and think it makes a useful contribution to the debate.
John Tate is Director, Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Policy & Strategy and Chairman, Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Studios & Post-Production
Comment number 1.
At 6th Oct 2011, Eponymous Cowherd wrote:***"The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú strongly believes that the open internet needs to be safeguarded to ensure consumers can access all the internet content and services of their choice. "***
The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú, then, needs to start practising what it preaches.
The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú attitude with regard to which devices can play which iPlayer content is anything but "neutral".
If the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú were truly committed to "Net neutrality" then it would publish an open API to iPlayer content rather than micromanaging it to the absurd extent it does now.
The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú is actively blocking 3GP iPlayer streams that any Android device can play (not to mention sending in the Lawyers against the 3rd party app that permitted them to be played) in preference for its own (exceedingly buggy, IMHO) Flash based player that is only available on high-end devices.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)