DeepEnigma
Gold Member
When repealing net neutrality rules, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai and fellow Republicans argued that consumers had nothing to worry about because the Federal Trade Commission would protect them from discriminatory practices by Internet service providers.
Source: ArsTechnica
But there was never any good reason to think the FTC could come close to replacing FCC oversight of broadband providers, and FTC Chairman Joseph Simons essentially confirmed as much in a speech last week.
Simons said that "blocking, throttling, or paid prioritization would not be per se antitrust violations." By contrast, the now-repealed FCC rules prohibited all three classes of behavior on a per se basis, Simons noted. Simons made the remarks at a telecom policy conference hosted by the Free State Foundation, a free-market think tank (see transcript).
The FCC gutted its own authority over ISPs by deciding that broadband is no longer telecommunications or a common-carrier service. That decision also gave the FTC some power to oversee ISPs, because the FTC is authorized to regulate non-common carriers, but the FTC can't issue its own net neutrality rules.
"The FTC is, principally, a law enforcement agency. It is not a sector regulator like the FCC," Simons said.
ISPs can block if they disclose it
The FTC can punish US companies for unfair or deceptive practices. But in regard to net neutrality, this simply means that ISPs must disclose any behavior that would have violated the old net neutrality rules.
"Under Section 5 of the FTC Act, we may prosecute unfair or deceptive acts or practices... Simply stated, we have a strong interest in ensuring that companies stand by their promises to consumers," Simons said.
The FTC would review whether ISPs keep their promises just as it reviews whether other companies keep their promises. "We would review ISPs' activities in the same way," Simons said. "For example, we could take action against ISPs if they block applications without adequately disclosing those practices or mislead consumers about what applications they block or how."
How would the FTC handle throttling of websites or online services? Simons explained:
To determine whether particular instances of throttling are deceptive, we would first evaluate what claims an ISP made to consumers about their services and how those claims are supported. We would look closely at any relevant research and evaluate the study's design, scope, and results and consider how a study relates to a particular claim. To evaluate whether a practice was unfair, we would consider whether the alleged throttling had countervailing benefits and whether there were reasonable steps consumers could have taken to avoid it. We would also consider consumer injury, the number of consumers affected, and the need to prevent future misconduct.In previous years, the FTC has sued both TracFone and AT&T for failing to adequately disclose throttling on unlimited data plans. (TracFone agreed to pay $40 million, and the AT&T case is still pending.)
With TracFone and AT&T, the alleged violation wasn't the throttling itself. The violation was the act of deceiving consumers.
Much more at the link:
Source: ArsTechnica
Last edited: