Free Press is still up in arms over what the reform group calls the Federal Communications Commission's "back room" meetings with big corporations to cut a deal on net neutrality rules.

"Despite public outrage and repeated promises of transparency, the FCC continues to meet behind closed doors with the largest companies to negotiate a secret deal that would short circuit public participation in policymaking that will shape the Internet for a generation," declared Free Press's Josh Silver in a message just sent to us. "The great irony here is that the FCC's 'transparency' policy is part of the negotiations behind closed doors."

Which stakeholders

We've been following this story since late June, when the news first surfaced about these meetings. They don't seem to be related to any single FCC proceeding. Rather, the focus is on some compromise deal on Internet nondiscrimination rules with which everyone can live, possibly enacted over on Capitol Hill, rather than via the Commission.

"Some stakeholders have shared their ideas with staff at the Commission, including ideas for legislative options," FCC Chief of Staff Edward Lazarus wrote on the FCC's blog. "To the extent stakeholders discuss proposals with Commission staff regarding other approaches outside of the open proceedings at the Commission, the agency's ex parte disclosure requirements are not applicable."

Lazarus' point here is that since ex parte rules only apply to specific rule-making or inquiry proceedings, the FCC's disclosure rules technically don't apply.

But for "secret," "closed," "back room" meetings, these have been remarkably open affairs. Here's the sordid history of these allegedly clandestine gatherings, summaries of which we found as plain as day on Lazarus' blog.

June 22

A small battalion of corporate biggies piled into the offices of Lazarus' office to talk up "details relating to prospective legislation relating to open Internet principles." The attendants included representatives from Verizon, Google, Skype, and the National Cable and Telecommunications Association, but it also included a rep from the Open Internet Coalition, which includes Free Press.

June 23

The next day the same crew had themselves another session. Markham Erickson of the Open Internet Coalition sent in a summary of the conversation, which touched on the following issues:

Prohibitions on blocking legal content and interfering with attachment of nonharmful devices;

Possible legislative language for a nondiscrimination principle;

Treatment of specialized services;

Transparency of broadband Internet service performance and network management practices;

An enforcement regime to protect consumers; and

The applicability of the principles to wireless platforms.

June 24

Of course it wouldn't be a picnic without the Motion Picture Association of America dropping by. Ars readers can doubtless guess what was discussed, but here's the thumbnail for the record:

"The purpose of the meeting was to discuss possible legislative proposals, in particular stressing that reasonable steps taken to address the transfer of unlawful content would not violate open internet principles," an MPAA wrap-up of the meeting concluded. The June 22/23 group also dropped by again for another conversation on the same bullet points.

June 28

Sprint showed up on the last Monday of June. As we've reported, the company is in sync with general telco opposition to the FCC partially reclassifying ISPs as Title II common carriers, but less vehemently so than AT&T and Verizon. Sprint's big issue is connectivity with those latter companies.

"In particular, Sprint emphasized the need to ensure access to data roaming and IP/VoIP interconnection" with other carriers, Sprint's summary of their conversation explained.

July 12, 14, and 19

Next, Google, Skype, and the Open Internet Coalition had their own session with the FCC, which mostly focused on possible legislative ways to ban the blocking of legal content. Two days later the NCTA, Verizon, and AT&T checked in for another meeting.

Then on July 19 a very mixed group gathered to offer solutions. The guests included the MPAA, the Directors Guild of America, Public Knowledge, and the Center for Democracy and Technology—the last two organizations were often at odds with the positions of the first two.

According to MPAA's summary of the meeting, they discussed:

Concerns that open Internet principles apply solely to lawful content;

Concerns about the FCC's jurisdiction over copyright law;

The importance of respecting privacy and protecting free speech;

Concerns about the possible implications of a nondiscrimination principle on the jobs, incomes, benefits, and creative output of Americans employed in the creative and entertainment industries.

The latest: on July 23, the June 22 group did a repeat performance of their prior discussions.

These conversations have all been earmarked in the FCC's two main net neutrality proceedings—broadband reclassification and open Internet proposals. But because they go beyond specific agency rules and deal with ideas for Congressional action, the Commission has more leeway to pick and choose with whom they wish to meet.

In that sense, they're less open than normal FCC gatherings, and it's unclear whether other groups are going to get their chance to tell the agency what Congress should do. But if everybody ran their "secret" meetings the way the Commission is running them here, Washington, DC would be a much more transparent place.

Update

Since we posted this story, the FCC has revised its public list of these meetings. The roster now includes conferences with the American Cable Association, XO Communications, T-Mobile USA, CTIA - The Wireless Association, Clearwire, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, Andrew Jay Schwartzman of the Media Access Project, The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, and Free Press.