ISPs Claim Poverty in Bid to Kill State Net Neutrality Rules

With the Trump administration busily gutting numerous consumer protections for broadband subscribers (from net neutrality rules to privacy protections), numerous states have now filled in the gaps. More than half the states in the nation are considering some form of state-level net neutrality rules in a bid to protect consumers. Other states, like California, are pursuing new privacy rules that would require ISPs be completely transparent about what consumer data is being collected and sold, and would require that they simply provide working opt out tools.

To try and fight these measures, ISP lobbyists are going state by state, falsely claiming that these consumer protections will put them out of business, notes the EFF

"In their effort to prevent states from protecting a free and open Internet, a small handful of massive and extraordinarily profitably Internet service providers (ISPs) are telling state legislatures that network neutrality would hinder their ability to raise revenues to pay for upgrades and thus force them to charge consumers higher bills for Internet access," the EFF's Ernesto Falcon notes.

"This is because state-based network neutrality will prohibit data discrimination schemes known as “paid prioritization” where the ISP charges websites and applications new tolls and relegate those that do not pay to the slow lane," he adds.

ISPs and their loyal lawmakers like Marsha Blackburn have been trying to ensure that "paid prioritization" is made legal in the wake of efforts to repeal federal net neutrality protections. Such deals would allow giant content companies (like, say, Disney or ESPN) to buy a distinct network latency and speed advantage over smaller competitors, unfairly distorting the traditional level internet playing field. ISPs could also abuse elimination of the rules by giving their own content an unfair advantage in the market.

But while ISPs claim they simply can't survive financially without such potentially anti-competitive deals, the EFF's full blog post more than deflates that flimsy premise.

"The fact is, more than half of Americans have one choice for high-speed broadband and the incumbents know they can rest on their legacy investments to maximize profits until they face competition from other broadband providers," the EFF notes."

"They don’t have to make their service better or faster, because most of their customers have to choose between them or nothing," the group adds. "They worked so hard to repeal our privacy protections and repeal net neutrality because since so many of us lack choice in the market they can start increasing their profits and give nothing to the consumer in return."