Net Neutrality Irony and Unintended Consequences
Ironically, March 1 to 7, 2015 is “National Consumer Protection Week” in the United States, a time when the Federal Trade Commission and 89 partners including nonprofit groups, businesses, and federal, state and local government agencies across the country will spotlight their efforts to protect consumers.
The irony comes because new Federal Communication Commission rules on network neutrality, regulating Internet access as a common carrier service will have the effect of ending the FTC’s ability to apply consumer protection rules to Internet access services.
“We do not have authority over common carriers,” said FTC Commissioner Maureen Ohlhausen. “There are significant issues about our ability to protect consumers under Title II.”
In the past, “to the extent network neutrality is an issue, the FTC has been able to address them,” said Ohlhausen. “We are consumer protection enforcers; we can do that.”
The FTC recently took action against a mobile service provider advertising “unlimited access” that actually throttled users of the plan, after a certain threshold of usage was reached, for example.
Under Title II, the FTC is barred from acting, however.
That is likely only the first “unintended consequence” that will surface once the 332-page document is formally released. The FCC has argued the new rules will not lead to rate regulation.
FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai does not agree. “For the first time, the FCC will regulate the rates that Internet service providers may charge and will set a price of zero for certain commercial agreements.”
Of course, much hinges on whether the new rule survives legal challenge, and whether Congress acts to restore a Title I framework.
Unintended consequences are highly likely.