The Drama of regulators, trying to regulate what must not and cannot be regulated.

Scott Bradner, Network World, 09/26/05


In mid-September the House Energy and Commerce Committee took its first shot at trying to set the ground rules for telecom reform. The committee was apparently trying to produce a more balanced starting point than the strongly pro-carrier bill proposed by Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.).


It says, "broadband Internet transmission service" (BITS) is a service that offers "the transmission of information in a packet-based protocol, including TCP/IP protocol or a successor protocol, regardless of facilities used." Likewise, a "broadband video service" is one that offers a "two-way, interactive service," with or without fee, to the public "regardless of the facilities used" and "integrates, on a real-time and subscriber customizable basis, a video programming package" and "integrates the capability to access Internet content of the subscriber's choosing. The draft also defines a "VoIP service" to be a "packet-switched voice communications service . . . effectively available directly to the public, regardless of the facilities used; and enables a subscriber to send or receive voice communications . . . over a broadband transmission service to or from any subscriber with a telephone number . . . or other identification method as designated by the commission."

The draft would require all BITS, broadband video and VoIP service providers to register with the government before they could offer service (there is a grace period for providers already in business).

What's wrong with this picture? Note that none of the definitions require a facilities-based service provider. All of these services can be offered over any infrastructure that supports IP. In theory, service providers anywhere in the world could provide them all, as long as there is sufficient bandwidth in the communications path. The draft does not seem to understand this basic feature of the Internet. "


What will happen when they won't be able to control "streaming, broadcasting, talking" because it will be done in a medium like the Internet where broadcasting is not from one source to many, but from many to many, when the content will be uncopyrighted content, when it will be impossible to check or control because the number of broadcasters will be enormously superior to the number of the ones who are supposed to control and regulate?

Well: this is the Internet, the World finally made global.
I can shout to as many as I can find wanting to listen to me.
My voice doesn't have the bound of distance.
I can reach China as well as USA or any part of Europe.

WHAT ABOUT IT?