[governance] Neelie Kroes's Next Steps on Net Neutrality

[Pranesh Prakash]

Dear all,
EU Commissioner Neelie Kroes recently posted this on her blog.

> But I do not propose to force each and every operator to provide full Internet: it is for consumers to vote with their feet. If consumers want to obtain discounts because they only plan to use limited online services, why stand in their way? And we don’t want to create obstacles to entrepreneurs who want to provide tailored connected services or service bundles, whether it’s for social networking, music, smart grids, eHealth or whatever. But I want to be sure that these consumers are aware of what they are getting, and what they are missing.


## Next steps on Net Neutrality – making sure you get champagne service
if that’s what you’re paying for

May 29th, 2012

When it comes to the issue of “net neutrality” I want to ensure that
Internet users can always choose full Internet access – that is, access
to a robust, best-efforts Internet with all the applications you wish.

But I don’t like to intervene in competitive markets unless I am sure
this is the only way to help either consumers or companies. Preferably
both. In particular because a badly designed remedy may be worse than
the disease – producing unforeseen harmful effects long into the future.
So I wanted better data before acting on net neutrality.

[One year ago][], I asked BEREC, the body of European network
regulators, to give me the evidence: are users provided with the right
quality of service? How much blocking and throttling is taking place? In
practice, how easy is it for users to “switch” operators or services? In
short, how easy is it for consumers to transparently choose the service
that works for them, including full Internet access if they want it?

I also asked European national legislators and regulators to wait for
better evidence before regulating on an uncoordinated,
[country-by-country basis][] that slows down the creation of a Digital
Single Market.

BEREC has [today][] provided the data I was waiting for. For most
Europeans, their Internet access works well most of the time. But these
findings show the need for more regulatory certainty and that there are
enough problems to warrant strong and targeted action to safeguard
consumers.

For the first time we know that at least 20%, and potentially up to half
of EU mobile broadband users have contracts that allow their Internet
service provider (ISP) to restrict services like VOIP (e.g. Skype) or
peer-to-peer file sharing.

Around 20% of fixed operators (spread across virtually all EU member
states) apply restrictions such as to limit peer-to-peer volumes at peak
times. This can affect up to 95% of users in a country.

At the same time, in nearly all Member States, most if not all ISPs
offer fixed and mobile Internet access services that are not subject to
such restrictions. According to the BEREC figures 85% of all fixed ISPs
and 76% of all mobile ISPs propose at least one unrestricted offer. So
the market is generally providing choice, but in some countries the
choices are quite limited in some EU countries.

But are customers really empowered to choose well? Do they realise what
they are signing up for? I didn’t read all the pages in my mobile
contract and I bet you didn’t either! I believe we all need more
transparent information.

Given that BEREC’s findings highlight a problem of effective consumer
choice, I will prepare recommendations to generate more real choices and
end the net neutrality waiting game in Europe.

First, consumers need clear information on actual, real-life broadband
speeds. Not just the speed at 3 am, but the speed at peak times. The
upload as well as the download speed. The minimum speed, if applicable.
And the speed you’ll get when you’re also watching IPTV as part of your
triple-play bundle, or downloading a video on demand via a premium
“managed” service. Plus, you should know what those advertised speeds
typically allow you to do online

Second, consumers also need clear information on the limits of what they
are paying for. Clear, quantified data ceilings are much better than
vague “fair use” policies that leave too much discretion to Internet
Service Providers (ISPs). They allow low-volume users to look for deals
that suit them. And they incentivise ISPs to price data volumes in ways
that reflect costs, and so support investment in modernising networks as
traditional voice revenues decline.

Third, consumers also need to know if they are getting Champagne or
lesser sparkling wine. If it is not full Internet, it shouldn’t be
marketed as such; perhaps it shouldn’t be marketed as “Internet” at all,
at least not without any upfront qualification. Regulators should have
that kind of control over how ISPs market the service.

But I do not propose to force each and every operator to provide full
Internet: it is for consumers to vote with their feet. If consumers want
to obtain discounts because they only plan to use limited online
services, why stand in their way? And we don’t want to create obstacles
to entrepreneurs who want to provide tailored connected services or
service bundles, whether it’s for social networking, music, smart grids,
eHealth or whatever. But I want to be sure that these consumers are
aware of what they are getting, and what they are missing.

Our guidance will make it easier to “switch” service providers, and
service offers, so that you can choose the market offer that suits you
best. And I will continue to monitor the market to ensure that European
consumers generally have access to competitive full Internet products,
fixed and mobile.

At the same time, products that limit Internet access often require
monitoring of online traffic, through so-called “packet inspection”.
This raises privacy concerns, and we need clear guidance on responsible
behaviour by ISPs; and on how consumers can exercise effective and
informed control if they opt for such products.

I am in favour of an open Internet and maximum choice. That must be
protected. But you don’t need me or the EU telling you what sort of
Internet services you must pay for.

  [One year ago]:
<http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/11/486&format=HTML&aged=1&language=EN&guiLanguage=en>
  [country-by-country basis]:
<http://www.eerstekamer.nl/nieuws/20120508/wetsvoorstel_wijziging_wet>
  [today]: <http://erg.eu.int/whatsnew/index_en.htm>

-- 
Pranesh Prakash  · Programme Manager · Centre for Internet and Society
@pranesh_prakash · PGP ID 0x1D5C5F07 · http://cis-india.org

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20120530/b11cbd97/attachment.sig>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t