European Commission to ‘name and shame’ ISPs on traffic management

European regulators are investigating member countries’ enforcement of net neutrality, a move Canadian industry experts say should be copied here. Last week, the European Commission asked its members’ communications regulators to spend the rest of the year investigating Internet service providers’ (ISPs) transparency, quality of service, blocking or throttling of traffic, and ease of changing operators. The Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications’ (BEREC), an organization representing European regulators, will hand over the fact-finding results to the European Commission for publication, creating an accessible list of any offending companies and determining whether more serious measures are needed. “I am determined to ensure that citizens and businesses in the EU can enjoy the benefits of an open and neutral internet, without hidden restrictions and at the speeds promised by their service providers,” Neelie Kroes, the European Commission’s vice-president for the digital agenda, said in an April 19 release. “If I am not satisfied, I will not hesitate to come up with more stringent measures, which may take the form of guidance or even general legislative measures to achieve the competition and choice consumers deserve. If this proves to be insufficient, I am ready to prohibit the blocking of lawful services or applications.” New EU regulations designed to enforce an open Internet come into force May 25. The new rules require member countries’ regulators to promote users’ ability “to access and distribute information or run applications and services of their choice.” The European Commission released a report to the EU Parliament last week, entitled “The open internet and net neutrality in Europe,” based on a public consultation conducted over three months last summer that drew more than 300 responses from network operators, content providers, governments, consumer and civil society organizations, and individuals. “It is widely accepted that network operators need to adopt some traffic management practices to ensure an efficient use of their networks and that certain IP services, such as … real-time IPTV and video conferencing, may require special traffic management to ensure a predefined high quality of service,” the report says. “However, the fact that some operators, for reasons unrelated to traffic management, may block or degrade legal services (in particular Voice over IP services) which compete with their own services can be considered to run against the open character of the Internet.” The report also noted the importance of transparency to net neutrality, and how information regarding traffic management or limitations gives consumers the power to choose between providers. National regulators received complaints that actual delivery speeds weren’t what providers advertised, the report noted. Blocking or throttling of lawful traffic, which can make it difficult to access or even restricting some websites or services, was one of the main concerns raised throughout the European Commission consultation. The report also cites a BEREC survey conducted last year that found throttling on peer-to-peer file sharing or video streaming in France, Greece, Hungary, Lithuania, Poland and the United Kingdom; it also found blocking of, or surcharges for, voice-over-Internet protocol (VoIP) services on operators’ mobile networks in Austria, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal and Romania. The survey did not disaggregrate outright blocking from surcharges. The report said consumer and civil society organizations cited various examples of throttling and blocking, and warned that blocking practices limited to VoIP platforms such as Skype could be extended to other online services like over-the-top TV streaming. “These are essential issues which need to be clarified further,” the report said. “It will therefore be important to get a clear view of the situation across the EU in a more exhaustive fact-finding exercise.” Ottawa technology consultant Bill St. Arnaud said the EU approach is much more forceful than the Canadian experience. The CRTC adopted its regulatory policy for ISPs’ traffic management practices in October 2009. The policy recognizes that “some measures are required to manage Internet traffic on ISP networks” and allows providers to manage Internet traffic at the retail level without prior approval. Under the policy, the commission can review practices “based on concerns arising primarily through complaints by consumers.” The CRTC told The Wire Report this month that it has received 32 complaints since the policy was adopted—primarily about throttling and ISP disclosures. “Here in Canada, it’s more regulation by exception, and only if you’re caught,” St. Arnaud said in an interview. John Lawford, legal counsel with the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC), agreed that the European approach appears to be more effective than Canada’s. “You’ve got Canada, where it’s up to users and companies who feel they’re being pushed around to bring these things to the attention of the regulator; whereas in Europe they go out looking for it,” he said in an interview. Lawford noted the link that the European Commission drew between net neutrality and competition. “Supposedly, if you throttle too many good applications, customers don’t pick you anymore. You don’t see that happening here,” he said. “That’s because the has a set of blinders on in terms of there being no incumbents here anymore, and no market power, and everything’s perfectly competitive—which is not true.” Lawford said the problems of throttling peer-to-peer and VoIP applications are the same in Canada as in Europe, but added that the CRTC should investigate practices and publish reports on any offenders, as the European Commission intends to do. St. Arnaud said that Neelie Kroes, vice-president of the European Commission for the digital agenda, doesn’t technically have the authority to enforce open Internet regulations. “It’s really up to the individual countries’ regulatory telecom authorities, who have the true power,” he said. “She can use jaw-boning and intimidation, and so forth, but when it comes down to it, it’s really up to the individual countries to implement the proper legislation or do the policing of the people violating net neutrality.” Still, he said Kroes' high profile, combined with a strategy of naming any offending companies, will make it hard for national regulators to ignore the initiative. mburgess@thewirereport.ca

European Commission to ‘name and shame’ ISPs on traffic management

News | 04/28/2011 6:07 pm EDT

To keep reading, get a free trial.

Already a Subscriber?

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us