Has net neutrality been neutered? — VOICES for REASON

The Federal Communication Commission’s crusade to impose net neutrality rules on the Internet hit a speed bump Tuesday. A U.S. appeals court ruled that the FCC exceeded its regulatory authority when it sanctioned Comcast for slowing down bandwidth hogs on its network and issued net neutrality guidelines for ISPs. (Net neutrality is a murky term meaning, roughly, that the government should regulate the Internet in order to ensure that all data is treated equally.)

This is good news for proponents of Internet freedom. As my colleague Alex Epstein has written:

Because the Internet is based on voluntary association, no one can properly compel others for their ad space, bandwidth, publicity–or network priority. Those who create these values have the right to use and profit from them as they see fit. Google has no more right to demand that Verizon be “neutral” with its network than Verizon has a right to demand that Google be “neutral” with its coveted advertising space. . . .

It is the freedom of participants on the Internet to offer and profit from whatever products, services, or content they choose that has made it such a phenomenal source of content and innovation. Net neutrality would deny ISPs that freedom. It would deny their right to engage in creative, innovative, and profitable activity with those networks–in the name of those who demand their bandwidth, but are unable or unwilling to earn it in a free market.

Unfortunately, the FCC remains committed to network neutrality. It’s going to be important for defenders of Internet freedom to continue making the case that the Internet should not be placed under Washington’s thumb.