MB Civic

June 12, 2006

Mr. Michael Butler
1520 Kensington-212
Oak Brook, IL  60523

Dear Mr. Butler:

Thank you for contacting me about network neutrality.  I appreciate having
your thoughts on this issue.

Net neutrality is a principle holding that Internet access providers
should not be permitted to engage in favoritism when configuring their
networks and delivering Internet content.  Such favoritism could occur if
a provider transmitted its own offerings at faster speeds than those of
its competitors or if a provider charged digital content and application
companies a fee for equally fast delivery.

This issue has gained attention recently as several telecommunications
company executives have made statements raising concerns that delivery may
be impaired for content providers unwilling to pay additional fees for
fast transmission.  Many of these executives later clarified that they
have no intention of degrading or blocking other traffic, particularly if
it might prompt customers to switch to other providers, but merely wish to
offer video delivery to their own customer base at a premium service level
unavailable to non-paying competitors.  Some in the industry have
favorably compared additional network performance tiers to airlines
selling coach and business class tickets or package delivery companies
offering ground and air service.  Other observers have expressed concern
about the impact of such steps on consumers.

Legislation on network neutrality has been offered, building on an
earlier, non-binding set of network neutrality principles adopted by the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in late 2005.  Most prominent
among these bills is the Internet Non-Discrimination Act of 2005, S. 2360,
introduced by Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon.  This bill would prohibit
network operators from generally impairing, or discriminating between, any
network traffic, in terms of bandwidth allocation, accessibility, or
pricing.  It also would require access providers to permit consumers to
connect devices to the provider’s network, as long as such actions do not
harm the provider’s network, while still permitting providers to take
defensive measures against network threats.  Consumers would be able to
bring complaints to the FCC for action and request that a federal court
review FCC decisions.

Opponents of network neutrality argue that a regime prohibiting “bit
discrimination” would deny network operators the opportunity to
differentiate their services from other providers, thereby stifling the
incentive to create innovative content for their customers.  They also
argue that network operators may face greater difficulties in raising the
funding necessary for planned infrastructure upgrades if the improved
network speeds would benefit their competitors as much as themselves.

Proponents of network neutrality — including major Internet content
providers, hardware and software companies, and consumer groups — point
to the money that operators already receive from end user and content
provider access fees, the technological innovation that network neutrality
may encourage, and the lack of high-speed Internet access marketplace
competition that leaves much of the country with little opportunity to
switch providers if their current provider were to engage in bit
discrimination against the services or applications preferred by
consumers.

S. 2360 has been referred to the Senate Commerce Committee.  I will keep
your thoughts in mind in case this legislation reaches the Senate floor.

Thank you again for your message.  Please keep in touch.

Sincerely,

Richard J. Durbin
United States Senator

RJD/