Should the Internet be treated like traditional phone services when it
comes to regulation and pricing? That is the contentious question as the
International Telecommunications Union, a United Nations agency with
roots dating back to 1865 and the interconnection of telegraph services,
meets in Dubai next week for the World Conference on International
Telecommunications (WCIT). The WCIT is a treaty-writing event that has
attracted growing attention given fears that the ITU and countries such
as Russia plan to use it to press for greater control over the Internet.
My weekly technology column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that there are certainly legitimate reasons for WCIT suspicion since the ITU
lacks transparency and largely excludes public participation. For
months, the ITU proposals scheduled for debate (known as International
Telecommunications Regulations or ITRs) were shrouded in secrecy and the
organization itself offered only limited opportunity for public
participation. Moreover, some countries view the WCIT as an opportunity
to increase their leverage over the Internet by proposing regulations
that would increase governmental controls.
While these issues are cause for concern, proposals aimed at seizing
control of Internet governance are unlikely to succeed and the reality
is that governments already flex their regulatory muscles within the
current U.S.-backed Internet governance framework.
The focus on a UN takeover of the Internet has obscured the real concern
with the WCIT, namely efforts by telecom companies to find new sources
of revenue by changing the way we pay for the Internet.
Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareTuesday November 27, 2012 |
|
View
|
|
Appeared in the Toronto Star on November 27, 2012 as UN Internet Meeting About Who Pays, Not Who Rules
Should the Internet be treated like traditional phone services when it
comes to regulation and pricing? That is the contentious question as the
International Telecommunications Union, a United Nations agency with
roots dating back to 1865 and the interconnection of telegraph services,
meets in Dubai next week for the World Conference on International
Telecommunications (WCIT). The WCIT is a treaty-writing event that has
attracted growing attention given fears that the ITU and countries such
as Russia plan to use it to press for greater control over the Internet.
There are certainly legitimate reasons for WCIT suspicion since the ITU
lacks transparency and largely excludes public participation. For
months, the ITU proposals scheduled for debate (known as International
Telecommunications Regulations or ITRs) were shrouded in secrecy and the
organization itself offered only limited opportunity for public
participation. Moreover, some countries view the WCIT as an opportunity
to increase their leverage over the Internet by proposing regulations
that would increase governmental controls.
While these issues are cause for concern, proposals aimed at seizing
control of Internet governance are unlikely to succeed and the reality
is that governments already flex their regulatory muscles within the
current U.S.-backed Internet governance framework.
The focus on a UN takeover of the Internet has obscured the real concern
with the WCIT, namely efforts by telecom companies to find new sources
of revenue by changing the way we pay for the Internet.
Before the emergence of the Internet, telecom companies often enjoyed
monopolies within their own countries and were able to extract enormous
fees for long distance calling and other services. Those revenues have
diminished in recent years as the Internet enables consumers to shift
from expensive telecom services to cheaper, more flexible, and less
regulated Internet-based alternatives such as Internet telephony,
instant messaging, and over-the-top video services.
Some telecom companies and developing countries with government-backed
monopoly providers now view the WCIT as an opportunity to bring the
traditional telecom model to the Internet. For example, the European
Telecommunications Network Operators Association (ETNO), a consortium of
41 telecom companies, has proposed a new sender pay model for Internet
traffic so that its members receive "fair compensation."
The interconnection of Internet traffic is generally managed through
"peering" arrangements in which Internet providers exchange traffic
without metering or further charges. The system means that sending
Internet traffic to another provider is effectively free with revenues
generated through a receiver pay model (ie. consumer and business
monthly Internet access subscription fees). Internet providers face
costs in building and maintaining their networks, but peering
arrangements ensure that there are few additional costs in transmitting
the data.
The ETNO has proposed replacing the current peering model with a
"sending network party pays" model, which would create enormous new
costs for major content providers such as Google or Netflix. The
long-term impact would be to either shift significant new costs to
consumers or lead to a global digital divide in which the large content
companies stop sending traffic to uneconomic countries where the
financial return from sending traffic is outweighed by the new
transmission costs.
Not only is ETNO seeking a new payment model for Internet traffic, but
it also wants new "quality of service" rules for the Internet that are
reminiscent of older telecom models and which would threaten net
neutrality principles that ensure that all Internet traffic is treated
equally.
Many countries, Internet companies, and even North American telecom
companies are on record as opposing ETNO's plans. Some have gone further
by asking whether Internet services belong in a telecom discussion and
expressing doubts about the need for ITRs in a marketplace that is
largely deregulated and has relied on private contracts to address
network traffic management. As the telecom world gathers in Dubai, it is
these issues that bear watching, not over-the-top claims about a United
Nations takeover of the Internet.
Michael Geist holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and
E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law. He can
reached at mgeist@uottawa.ca or online at www.michaelgeist.ca. Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareTuesday November 27, 2012 |
|
|
