Net neutrality has been a controversial issue.  Despite this, Federal Communications Commission or FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski has proposed to make the rules in net neutrality official, along with a couple of new rules that aim to make sure that online consumers' rights are protected when they search for information through the Internet.

Genachowski's proposed net neutrality regulations

Currently, there are no official regulations that protect the open Internet.  Genachowski wants to change all this by proposing an official set of rules based on the four basic principles that the FCC uses as a guide.   These four principles basically state that network operators are not allowed to prohibit users from gaining access to legal online applications, content, and services that they choose to access.  Network operators are also not allowed to prevent users from attaching safe and legal devices to the actual network.  Aside from these already existing guiding principles, Genachowski has proposed to add two more official regulations.  The first proposed official regulation aims to stop ISPs or Internet Service Providers from discriminating against certain online applications and content without interfering with reasonable and logical network management.  The second proposed official regulation to preserve the neutrality of the Internet aims to make sure that Internet access providers are doing honest network management practices.

Genachowski's supporters and critics

Due to Genachowski's efforts in maintaining net neutrality, he has earned several supporters, including Internet giants.  Among Genachowski's supporters are YouTube founder Steve Chen, Amazon's Jeff Bezos, Facebook CEO and founder Mark Zuckerberg, Twitter CEO Evan Williams, Skype CEO Josh Silverman, Google CEO Eric Schmidt, Craiglist founder Craig Newmark, and IAC CEO Barry Diller.  According to a letter sent by these Internet giants to FCC chairman Genachowski, his efforts in regulating neutrality rules will inspire budding online entrepreneurs and existing companies to become more innovative because they won't have to fear that their applications and products might be blocked by bigger competitors.  Aside from these Internet giants, two democratic FCC commissioners also support Genachowski's proposal.

Critics of Genachowski and his proposed official regulations include a number of Republican congressional leaders.  According to critics, there is no need to come up with an official set of net neutrality rules.  Critics also think that if official regulations are implemented, it would become difficult for net-based companies to manage their networks.

Other issues regarding net neutrality

Aside from the fact that the details for these regulations will still have to be mapped out, Genachowski also has to make sure that these rules won't affect how wireless networks will function.  According to Steve Largent, CTIA President and CEO, FCC should keep in mind the dangers of the possible consequences a new set of regulations might have on wireless Internet services in general.

The target of blanketing the entire US with broadband connectivity has just been estimated to cost the US around $350 billion, as reported by the Federal Communications Commission recently. The report was released by the task force that was appointed to handle the job, headed by Blair Levin, former chief of staff to Reed Hunt. The commission’s final report is slated to be delivered in front of Congress in February.

Earlier estimates pointed to around $20 billion, but this was for Internet speeds of 768Kbps to 3Mbps. FCC raised questions about whether this would be enough, and pushed for an alternative nationwide service with a speed of 100Mbps or faster, resulting in the drastic hike in estimated costs. Although other alternatives are still being examined, the bottom line is that wiring the entire United States, from the urban jungles to the rural areas, is going to cost the nation a lot. This is not stopping Congress from allocating $7 billion to the project as part of the economic stimulus package. The private sector is expected to pitch in.

According to Levin, most of the Internet is funded by the private sector, and they are expecting the cooperation of private companies when it comes to supporting this project.

"Most of that ecosystem is funded by the private sector. We expect that to continue," Levin said.

Where can the government play a role in ensuring and improving the role of that ecosystem?"

The reason why blanketing the entire US with broadband service costs a lot lies in the need for infrastructure, especially in the rural areas. Alongside infrastructure costs are maintenance and operating costs, which will require manpower and financial allocation for transportation. However, despite the cost, high speed broadband is the only way to go, according to the FCC. This is because  Internet use is expected to go up in the coming years, specifically an increase in the number of users and an increase in bandwidth requirements. While most of the common activities on the Internet today such as email, surfing, and instant messaging require very little bandwidth, the increasing trend of video uploads, video conferencing, and medical monitoring are expected to require significantly more.

Going wireless

Another critical issue is wireless Internet connectivity, with the popularity of smart phones which are expected to overtake the sales of traditional cell phones a few years from now. Because smart phones are capable of wireless data services such as emailing, video uploads, and virtually anything else you can do with a basic net book, broadband providers are expected to beef up their networks in anticipation of this to provide more capacity for the increasing number of smart phone users. Verizon Wireless and Sprint Nextel are leading the pack when it comes to early upgrades in their systems to accommodate the new wave of smart phone users, but according to the FCC, more networks are needed for a wider spectrum of providers that consumers can choose from.

Armed with complaints that Google’s voice service blocks users from calling certain numbers, AT&T is urging the FCC to look into Google for the sake of net neutrality, saying that this action by Google is against FCC call blocking regulations. The rules that govern what telephone companies can do are clear and heavily enforced. However, the rules are less clearly defined when it comes to Internet calls, a fact that AT&T obviously wants to change, saying that the FCC "cannot, through inaction or otherwise, give Google a special privilege to play by its own rules."

If the major telephone networks have to abide by the same rules set by the FCC, Internet companies have to do so as well. AT&T further asserts that Google is using this call blocking capability to attract more customers, something which traditional call services cannot do, saying that, by doing so, Google is violating net-neutrality principles.

Google blocks users from calling adult entertainment phone numbers, numbers in rural areas, as well as some conference networks due to the high fees required to use these numbers, which is one way to reduce the operating cost of Google Voice.

What Google has to say

In response, Google stated in a blog that its voice service is not required to follow the traditional protocols governing AT&T and other phone carriers because it is not a telephone communications network but a voice service. Google Voice is only effective when one already has an existing phone connection. It is also free and customers cannot make any outbound calls through Google Voice on a traditional phone device. One needs to be online in order to make voice calls with this software. This is also invitation-only software and is currently serving a limited number of customers.

Net neutrality principles set forth by the FCC only apply to broadband carriers and does not have over its jurisdiction the ability to control web-based computer software. Google went on to say that AT&T was only filing its complaint in order to undermine its online competitors. Others are calling this move by the AT&T a "political stunt." The Free Press warned that this was a "red herring," an attempt by AT&T to distract attention from the FCC’s efforts on net neutrality.

Previously AT& T was also involved in the minor scuffle between Google and Apple Inc. during the latter’s alleged rejection of Google Voice as an iPhone application. AT&T allegedly was urging Apple to block the app because it would allow customers to make long distance calls. The telecom giant has also expressed in previous press statements that the FCC should not regulate and prohibit telecom companies from managing the networks that they spent millions of dollars to build.