Randal S. Milch, executive vice president, public policy, and general counsel of Verizon, today responded to FCC proposal on net neutrality.
“Verizon has long been committed to an open Internet for a simple reason: our customers demand it. This was true before the FCC ever considered putting rules in place, and serving our customers will ensure our commitment to an open Internet regardless of what the FCC does in the future,” Milch said.
Verizon said the Internet’s remarkable growth and innovation is in part the result of ongoing investment by broadband providers deploying faster, more innovative networks.
During the past six years, Verizon alone has invested over $100 billion in deploying its fiber to the home and wireless broadband networks. This investment was encouraged by a bipartisan consensus for light-touch regulation of the Internet that began in the Clinton administration.
Also read: FCC net neutrality rules open fight between telecoms and content firms
“We look forward to reviewing the FCC’s proposal, and we will be constructively engaged in the months to come. But one thing is clear: For the FCC to impose 1930s utility regulation on the Internet would lead to years of legal and regulatory uncertainty and would jeopardize investment and innovation in broadband,” said Milch.
The Federal Communications Commission today adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking addressing the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand of the FCC’s 2010 net neutrality order.
TelecomLead News Team
Verizon says this while they are currently in the process of following comcast and also extorting money from netflix to stop throttling the service.
Yes verizon, it is throttling when the service is slow by the same amount at all hours of the day. While it can be understood that peering ports can become saturated, it seems that what verizon has done is measure the performance during peak saturation, and then throttle the individual user performance to those levels 24/7.
All this ruling will do is legitimize what verizon is doing and allow for them to take it to a larger scale, and essentially encourage anyone hosting anything online to pay for fast lane access by making sure that infrastructure is not upgraded, and also that failed equipment does not get repaired.
By allowing for a fast lane, the only time the network will be maintained or upgraded is when even with QOS there is not enough throughput available to support the fast lanes.
This will overall become a major downgrade for all customers as the only times they will get anything close to what they are paying for, is when they are getting content from a provider that paid the ISP’s ransom.