CYBER WARS - Protecting Consumer Data

"FCC chief outlines new plans to protect consumer data online" PBS NewsHour 10/27/2016

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  There are new rules for broadband providers when it comes to collecting and sharing consumer data.  On Thursday, the Federal Communications Commission voted for the first time to create protections on the transmission of personal information for broadband providers.  Hari Sreenivasan speaks with Tom Wheeler, chairman of the FCC.

HARI SREENIVASAN (NewsHour):  New rules for broadband providers when it comes to collecting and sharing customer data.

The Federal Communications Commission voted for the first time today to create protections on the transmission of personal information from broadband providers.

Tom Wheeler is the chairman of the FCC.  And he joins me now.

What is a provider going to have to do under these new rules?

TOM WHEELER, Chairman, Federal Communications Commission:  Well, the key thing is that it is the consumers' information.  It's not the network's information.

And the consumer now has the choice to say how they want that information to be used and if they want it to be used.  So, there are really three key things.  One, there has to be transparency, that the consumers have to be told, here's what we're doing with your information.  Two, they have to have choice.  So, do you want to opt in or opt out of this kind of service?

And, three, that data, when it's stored someplace, has to be stored securely and consumers have to know if there is some kind of data breach.

HARI SREENIVASAN:  So, you have also expanded the definition of what is sensitive data.  And some businesses have pushed back, saying, the browsing history, the app usage, Internet companies like Facebook and Google, they already have all that, and you're placing undue burdens on companies like Verizon, AT&T, et cetera.

TOM WHEELER:  But what we're talking about is not the fact that you may go to a dozen sites that each will get a little bit of information.

We're talking about the network that takes you to every site and knows everything you're doing.  And that's the big difference.  You hire the network to deliver you to those sites.  You don't hire the network to take your information without your permission and turn around and resell it.

INTERNET - FCC Goes For Non-Neutrality

Consumers, bend over and spread cheeks.

"F.C.C., in a Shift, Backs Fast Lanes for Web Traffic" by EDWARD WYATT, New York Times 4/23/2014

Excerpt

The principle that all Internet content should be treated equally as it flows through cables and pipes to consumers looks all but dead.

The Federal Communications Commission said on Wednesday that it would propose new rules that allow companies like Disney, Google or Netflix to pay Internet service providers like Comcast and Verizon for special, faster lanes to send video and other content to their customers.

The proposed changes would affect what is known as net neutrality — the idea that no providers of legal Internet content should face discrimination in providing offerings to consumers, and that users should have equal access to see any legal content they choose.

The proposal comes three months after a federal appeals court struck down, for the second time, agency rules intended to guarantee a free and open Internet.

Tom Wheeler, the F.C.C. chairman, defended the agency’s plans late Wednesday, saying speculation that the F.C.C. was “gutting the open Internet rule” is “flat out wrong.”  Rather, he said, the new rules will provide for net neutrality along the lines of the appeals court’s decision.

Still, the regulations could radically reshape how Internet content is delivered to consumers.  For example, if a gaming company cannot afford the fast track to players, customers could lose interest and its product could fail.

The rules are also likely to eventually raise prices as the likes of Disney and Netflix pass on to customers whatever they pay for the speedier lanes, which are the digital equivalent of an uncongested car pool lane on a busy freeway.

Consumer groups immediately attacked the proposal, saying that not only would costs rise, but also that big, rich companies with the money to pay large fees to Internet service providers would be favored over small start-ups with innovative business models — stifling the birth of the next Facebook or Twitter.

“If it goes forward, this capitulation will represent Washington at its worst,” said Todd O’Boyle, program director of Common Cause’s Media and Democracy Reform Initiative.  “Americans were promised, and deserve, an Internet that is free of toll roads, fast lanes and censorship — corporate or governmental.”

If the new rules deliver anything less, he added, “that would be a betrayal.”

Mr. Wheeler rebuffed such criticism.  “There is no ‘turnaround in policy,’ ” he said in a statement.  “The same rules will apply to all Internet content.  As with the original open Internet rules, and consistent with the court’s decision, behavior that harms consumers or competition will not be permitted.”

Broadband companies have pushed for the right to build special lanes.  Verizon said during appeals court arguments that if it could make those kinds of deals, it would.

Under the proposal, broadband providers would have to disclose how they treat all Internet traffic and on what terms they offer more rapid lanes, and would be required to act “in a commercially reasonable manner,” agency officials said.  That standard would be fleshed out as the agency seeks public comment.

"Consumer groups warn dismantling net neutrality could stymie startup innovation" PBS NewsHour 4/24/2014

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The Federal Communications Commission is on the brink of changing the longstanding net neutrality principle, which allows consumers unfettered access to web content, and limits the ability of Internet service providers to block or filter material.  New guidelines would allow some companies to charge more (to the content provider, like YouTube) for faster service.  Gwen Ifill talks to Cecilia Kang of The Washington Post about what’s at stake.

INTERNET - FCC Net Neutrality Rules

"Will end of net neutrality rules impact future innovation?" PBS Newshour 1/15/2014

Excerpt

HARI SREENIVASAN (Newshour):  Net neutrality is the idea that broadband Internet service providers, Comcast, Time Warner Cable, Verizon and others, should treat everything that flows across the Internet equally.  That means preventing service providers from creating fast lanes for sites they have business ties with, such as streaming video services like Hulu or Netflix, and slowing access to others, like Amazon.

It also means not charging more for YouTube and other sites based on their heavier bandwidth use or in exchange for faster speeds, all of which could affect what consumers see online, how fast, and at what price.  The principles were set out by the Federal Communications Commission nearly a decade ago.

The agency enshrined them in its Open Internet Order adopted in 2010.  But Verizon sued to challenge the agency's authority, and, yesterday, the U.S. District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia found the FCC acted improperly.  The 81-page ruling said the agency is wrong to classify Internet service providers as information services, but at the same time regulate them as common carriers, meaning as it does telephone and utility companies.

While the FCC decides whether to appeal, Amazon and others are watching to see if the broadband networks impose their own rules, favoring some content companies over others.

For its part, Verizon issued a statement yesterday that said, in part:  "Verizon has been and remains committed to the open Internet.  This will not change in light of the court's decision."

The ruling doesn't apply to wireless services accessed through mobile devices, which represent a growing share of the market.

NETWORK - Internet Access, NET Neutrality

"F.C.C. Is Set to Regulate Net Access" by BRIAN STELTER, New York Times 12/20/2010

Excerpt

The Federal Communications Commission appears poised to pass a controversial set of rules that broadly create two classes of Internet access, one for fixed-line providers and the other for the wireless Net.

The proposed rules of the online road would prevent fixed-line broadband providers like Comcast and Qwest from blocking access to sites and applications. The rules, however, would allow wireless companies more latitude in putting limits on access to services and applications.

Before a vote set for Tuesday, two Democratic commissioners said Monday that they would back the rules proposed by the F.C.C. chairman, Julius Genachowski, which try to satisfy both sides in the protracted debate over so-called network neutrality. But analysts said the debate would soon resume in the courts, as challenges to the rules are expected in the months to come.

Net neutrality, broadly speaking, is an effort to ensure equal access to Web sites and cutting-edge online services. Mr. Genachowski said these proposed rules aimed to both encourage Internet innovation and protect consumers from abuses.

“These rules fulfill a promise to the future — to companies that don’t yet exist, and the entrepreneurs that haven’t yet started work in their dorm rooms or garages,” Mr. Genachowski said in remarks prepared for the commission’s meeting on Tuesday in Washington. At present, there are no enforceable rules “to protect basic Internet values,” he added.

Many Internet providers, developers and venture capitalists have indicated that they would accept the proposal by Mr. Genachowski, which Rebecca Arbogast, a regulatory analyst for Stifel Nicolaus, a financial services firm, said “is by definition a compromise.”

UPDATE

"F.C.C. Approves Net Rules and Braces for Fight" by BRIAN STELTER, New York Times 12/21/2010

Excerpt

Want to watch hours of YouTube videos or sort through Facebook photos on the computer? Your Internet providers would be forbidden from blocking you under rules approved by the Federal Communications Commission on Tuesday. But if you want to do the same on your cellphone, you may not have the same protections.

The debate over the rules, intended to preserve open access to the Internet, seems to have resulted in a classic Washington solution — the kind that pleases no one on either side of the issue. Verizon and other service providers would prefer no government involvement. Public interest advocates think the rules stop far short of ensuring free speech.