Will broadband providers control content?

NEW YORK — As the U.S.’ Internet architecture moves from dial-up access to broadband, some speakers at the Computers, Freedom and Privacy (CFP) conference here Thursday expressed concern that the major cable operators that provide the high-speed networks will control users’ access to content.

“If we don’t do something now broadband access will be based on the TV model — it will all be about directing marketing and advertising to your household,” said Jeff Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy.

Chester’s fear is of a broadband world where cable operators steer users to content, services and applications that they or their partners own, and impede access to competitors’ offerings, by slowing down users’ connection rates to those sites or blocking them altogether.

“It’s about bucks and bites, not about free speech,” he said.

However, Michael Schooler, deputy general counsel of the National Cable Television Association, dismissed claims that broadband providers would control users’ access to Web offerings.

“[Cable operators] don’t do this now, and I don’t think it’s going to happen in the future,” he said.

While Chester and others argue for either allowing ISPs (Internet service providers) open access to the high-speed networks, or drafting regulations preventing broadband providers from limiting users’ access to Web content and services, Schooler believes that these measures are excessive.

“We don’t want to live under an uncertain regulatory environment,” Schooler said. “Normally in Washington we consider regulation if there is a market failure.”

The spirited debate comes as the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is currently considering whether it should adopt rules for broadband consumers, according to the speakers.

Paula H. Boyd, regulatory counsel to Microsoft, said that the issue is important to the software giant and it is asking the FCC to adopt a rule that prevents high-speed network providers from limiting consumers’ access to content, services, and applications on the Web.

“We want to compete in the marketplace for consumers without intervention from network folks,” Boyd said. She added that Microsoft envisions a future where its software will be downloaded from the Web, and fears that access to these applications could be impeded if a network provider is looking after its own interests.

Still, Schooler, who was the only cable industry representative debating the issue at CFP, argued that fettered access has so far not been an issue. Furthermore, he questioned large Internet players’ motives for regulatory relief in the still nascent marketplace.

“You should be suspicious of industry leaders’ advance efforts for a regulatory fix,” he said. “What do they have planned?”

The Center for Digital Democracy’s Chester dismissed notions of an ISP cabal, however, saying that network operators’ promises to be well-behaved were of little comfort.

If no safeguards are put in place “the media model will prevail,” Chester said. He added that the debate to regulate broadband providers is an important one given that he believes that the Internet is one of the last true forums for free speech.

“This fight is about the soul of the Internet,” he said. “Unless we intervene …we may look back and see dial-up [Internet access] as the golden age.”

Schooler disagreed, noting that the cable industry has made serious investments to provide high-speed access to 80 percent of U.S. households.

High-speed access doesn’t limit content and services on the Web, it makes possible services we never dreamed of before, he said.

CFP runs through Friday in New York.