Em 24 de abril deste ano, em votação apertada (3 a 2) a FCC norte-americana reverteu um entendimento de 2017 que havia alterado o conceito de “neutralidade de rede”, estabelecido em 2014… Ou seja, em têrmos de “neutralidade”, volta-se a 2014. Não é uma discussão simples, como aliás denota o movimento pendular da FCC no tema e a posição de diversos importantes personagens na área, mas vale a pena tentar olhar melhor o que se esconde no vai-e-vem regulatório (o verbete da Wikipedia sobre neutralidade de rede nos EUA é alentado e traz bastante informação).
FCC, a agência reguladora de telecomunicações norte-americana, tem mais ou menos um papel como o da Anatel no Brasil. Na origem, esta discussão está ligada a quando houve uma rápida expansão da banda larga para o provimento de acesso à Internet. Os provedores de banda larga são, muitas vezes, simultaneamente provedores de serviços de telecomunicação. Assim, surge uma superposição de Internet e telecomunicações no tema. A FCC age no âmbito da telecomunicação, e não da informação… Se “banda larga” para Internet for serviço de “informação”, os provedores podem ter a liberdade de criar tarifas diferenciadas, ou bloqueios a sítios de concorrentes. Em termos de internet, não seria o que se entende por “neutralidade”.Na regra original criada em 2014 – e notemos que o Marco Civil, também de 2014, alinha-se – há seis pontos a observar: 1- um provedor de banda larga não pode, a seu talante, bloquear conteúdo legal, aplicativos ou serviços. 2- é vedado ao provedor, com base no conteúdo, degradar ou acelerar intencionalmente uma conexão. 3- deve haver transparência sobre as regras em uso, o desempenho e características da rede. 4- inovadores e consumidores devem ter direito a “jogo equânime”. 5- Pode haver eventual gestão no roteamento por motivos técnicos, desde que de forma razoável e transparente. 6- Não pode haver priorização paga, dando vantagem a serviços que paguem extra…
Em 17 de julho de 2017, um documento assinado por 200 pioneiros da Internet, criticava tecnicamente a decisão da FCC e, em dezembro, um conjunto de 20 das mais conhecidas personalidades da Internet redigiu uma carta aberta onde, quase literalmente, argumentava que a “FCC não havia entendido o que era a Internet”. Entre os signatários, Steve Crocker, Steve Wozniak, Tim Berners-Lee, Vint Cerf e outros. O parágrafo final da carta conclamava o chefe da FCC Ajit Pai, que cancelasse a votação “apressada e tecnicamente falha”, que visava a abolir as proteções de neutralidade da rede. “Um risco iminente à Internet que trabalhamos tanto em criar.”.
Para a FCC ter poder de regular algo, isso deve ser considerado um “serviço de telecomunicação”. Com a votação de abril, o fornecimento de banda larga volta a ser um serviço de telecomunicação e, com isso, sujeito à regulação nos termos que a decisão de 2017 definia. Estou entre os que se alegram bastante com essa retomada da neutralidade. Pode, entretanto, não ser um sentimento unânime... Aguardemos os desdobramentos.
===
A volta da neutralidade da redehttps://www.phonearena.com/news/net-neutrality-returns_id157731
"It's baaack. Net Neutrality, the rule that requires all internet streams to be treated the same, has been reinstated by a 3-2 vote by the sitting FCC commissioners. The voting went along party lines with the three Democratic commissioners voting in favor of the rule while the two Republicans voted against it. The Obama-era FCC passed the rules in 2015 to prevent ISPs and mobile carriers from charging more to content streamers for a faster pipeline to the public. It also prevents carriers from blocking the dissemination of text messages whose content they do not agree with.
As an example, Net Neutrality prevents your favorite video streaming service from paying more to an ISP or a wireless provider to obtain a faster stream for the video streamer's customers. Without Net Neutrality, the internet provider could charge the video streamer more for the faster pipeline and this charge could find its way onto your monthly bill."
===
A decisão de 2014 sobre neutralidade de rede:
https://web.archive.org/web/20060424065626/http://static.publicknowledge.org/pdf/nn-letter-20060301.pdf
In December 2014, the FCC released the Open Internet Order of 2010, which established six net neutrality principles for internet service providers (ISPs):
- No blocking: ISPs cannot block legal content, apps, services, or the connection of non-harmful devices to the network- No throttling: ISPs cannot intentionally slow down or speed up content based on the type of service or their preferences
- Transparency: Consumers and innovators have the right to know how their network is being managed and the basic performance characteristics of their internet access
- Level playing field: Consumers and innovators have the right to a level playing field
- Network management: Broadband providers are allowed to engage in reasonable network management
- No paid prioritization: No service should be slowed down because it doesn't pay a fee
In 2015, the FCC adopted conduct rules that codified these principles, including the requirement that broadband customers have access to all paid internet destinations and that ISPs cannot impair lawful internet traffic based on content, source, or destination.
===
A Carta Aberta de 2017:
https://www.benton.org/headlines/internet-pioneers-and-leaders-tell-fcc-you-don%E2%80%99t-understand-how-internet-works
The Honorable Roger Wicker,
Chair Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, Innovation, and the Internet
The Honorable Brian Schatz,
Ranking Member Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, Innovation, and the Internet
The Honorable Marsha Blackburn,
ChairHouse Energy Subcommittee on Communications and Technology
The Honorable Michael F. Doyle,
Ranking MemberHouse Energy Subcommittee on Communications and Technology
____________________
Senator Wicker:
Senator Schatz:
Representative Blackburn:
Representative Doyle:
We are the pioneers and teca flawed and hnologists who created and now operate the Internet, and some of the innovators and business people who, like many others, depend on it for our livelihood. We are writing to respectfully
urge you to call on FCC Chairman Ajit Pai to cancel the December 14 vote on the FCC’s proposed Restoring Internet Freedom Order (WC Docket No. 17-108 ).
This proposed Order would repeal key network neutrality protections that prevent Internet access providers from blocking content, websites and applications, slowing or speeding up services or classes of service, and charging online services for access or fast lanes to Internet access providers’ customers. The proposed Order would also repeal oversight over other unreasonable discrimination and unreasonable practices, and over interconnection with last-mile Internet access providers. The proposed Order removes long-standing FCC oversight over Internet access providers without an adequate replacement to protect consumers, free markets and online innovation.
It is important to understand that the FCC’s proposed Order is based on a flawed and factually inaccurate understanding of Internet technology. These flaws and inaccuracies were documented in detail in a 43-page-long joint comment signed by over 200 of the most prominent Internet pioneers and engineers and submitted to the FCC on July 17, 2017.
Despite this comment, the FCC did not correct its misunderstandings, but instead premised the proposed Order on the very technical flaws the comment explained. The technically-incorrect proposed Order dismantles 15 years of targeted oversight from both Republican and Democratic FCC chairs, who understood the threats that Internet access providers could pose to open markets on the Internet.
The experts’ comment was not the only one the FCC ignored. Over 23 million comments have been submitted by a public that is clearly passionate about protecting the Internet. The FCC could not possibly have considered these adequately.
Indeed, breaking with established practice, the FCC has not held a single open public meeting to hear from citizens and experts about the proposed Order.
Furthermore, the FCC’s online comment system has been plagued by major problems that the FCC has not had time to investigate. These include bot-generated comments that impersonated Americans, including dead people, and an unexplained outage of the FCC’s on-line comment system that occurred at the very moment TV host John Oliver was encouraging Americans to submit comments to the system.
Compounding our concern, the FCC has failed to respond to Freedom of Information Act requests about these incidents and failed to provide information to a New York State Attorney General’s investigation of them.
We therefore call on you to urge FCC Chairman Pai to cancel the FCC’s vote. The FCC’s rushed and technically incorrect proposed Order to abolish net neutrality protections without any replacement is an imminent threat to the Internet we worked so hard to create. It should be stopped.
Signed,
Frederick J. Baker, IETF Chair 1996-2001, ISOC Board Chair 2002-2006
Mitchell Baker, Executive Chairwoman, Mozilla Foundation
Steven M. Bellovin, Internet pioneer, FTC Chief Technologist, 2012-2013
Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web & professor, MIT
John Borthwick, CEO, Betaworks
Scott O. Bradner, Internet pioneer
Vinton G. Cerf, Internet pioneer
Stephen D. Crocker, Internet pioneer
Whitfield Diffie, inventor of public-key cryptography
David J. Farber, Internet pioneer, FCC Chief Technologist 1999-2000
Dewayne Hendricks, CEO Tetherless Access
Martin E. Hellman, Internet security pioneer
Brewster Kahle, Internet pioneer, founder, Internet Archive
Susan Landau, cybersecurity expert & professor, Tufts University
Theodor Holm Nelson, hypertext pioneer
David P. Reed, Internet pioneerA decisão de 2014 sobre neutralidade de rede:
===
.jpeg)
