Prohibiting ISPs From Blocking or Throttling Content But Allowing Paid Prioritization (S. 2510)

What is S. 2510?

(Updated December 17, 2019)

This bill — known as the Open Internet Preservation Act — would prohibit internet service providers (ISPs) from blocking legal content or services and from impairing or “throttling” internet traffic on the basis of content. ISPs would be allowed to offer specialized services (like paid prioritization) but couldn’t offer them in ways that threaten the meaningful availability of broadband internet or are designed to evade the prohibitions imposed by this bill.

States and their political subdivisions would be prohibited from enforcing a law or rule related to internet openness obligations in providing broadband internet service, meaning that this federal law would preempt state law.

Broadband internet service would be considered an “information service” under Title II of the Communications Act, effectively blocking the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from attempting to re-impose net neutrality rules in the same manner it did in 2015.

Argument in favor

This bill protects consumers and strikes an appropriate balance between ensuring that ISPs can’t block or throttle content on the internet, while allowing for innovative services like paid prioritization to be attempted.

Argument opposed

This bill doesn’t go nearly far enough in terms of re-imposing net neutrality rules, as paid prioritization of content should not be allowed. States should be able to make their own open internet standards.

Impact

Internet users; ISPs; states; and the FCC.

Cost of S. 2510

A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.

Additional Info

In-Depth: Sponsoring Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) introduced this bill to protect consumers by preventing Internet Service Providers (ISPs) from slowing down and controlling web content, and requiring them to disclose their terms of service:

“Some cable companies and content providers aren’t going to be happy with this bill because it prohibits them from blocking and throttling web content. They won’t be able to micromanage your web surfing our punish you for downloading 50 movies each month. This bill strikes a compromise that benefits the consumer. If the Democrats are serious about this issue and finding a permanent solution, then they should come to the table and work with me and Rep. Blackburn on these bills. Does this bill resolve every issue in the net neutrality debate? No, it doesn’t. It’s not a silver bullet. But it’s a good start.”

Net neutrality advocates have criticized this bill as “insincere”, with Jon Fingas writing in a column in Engadget:

“This legislation would technically forbid internet providers from blocking and throttling content, but it wouldn’t bar paid prioritization. Theoretically, ISPs could create de facto “slow lanes” for competing services by offering mediocre speeds unless they pay for faster connections. The bill would also curb the FCC’s ability to deal with other violations, and would prevent states from passing their own net neutrality laws. In short, the bill is much more about limiting regulation than protecting open access and competition.”

Companion legislation has been introduced in the House by Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn (R-TN).

Media:

• Sponsoring Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) Press Release
  
• Broadcasting & Cable
  
• Engadget (Op-Ed In Favor)
  
• U.S. Chamber of Commerce (In Favor)