The EU Approves Net Neutrality

The European parliament approved the "Open access to internet" rules (see "The EU 'Enshrines Net Neutrality’s no Blocking or Throttling Rules'" - here and the proposal's text here).

"The new law will oblige firms offering internet access to treat all traffic equally, i.e. not to block or slow delivery of content, applications or services from selected senders or to selected receivers, unless this is necessary to obey court orders, comply with laws, prevent network congestion or combat cyber-attacks. If such traffic management measures are needed, they will have to be "transparent, non-discriminatory and proportionate" and may not last for longer than necessary.

An operator will nonetheless be able to offer specialized services (such as the improved internet quality needed for certain services), but only on condition that this does not have an impact on general internet quality". 

In addition - "MEPs ensured that internet providers will have to give users who are about to sign fixed or mobile internet contracts a clear explanation of what download and upload speeds (compared to the advertised speed) they can usually expect. 

Any significant discrepancy that is continuous or occurs regularly will trigger a right to remedies such as terminating the contract or getting compensation. The national regulatory authorities will be responsible for verifying whether the difference is a breach of contract or not"

See "End in sight for mobile phone “roaming” fees and unequal internet access" - here.

The EU "Enshrines Net Neutrality’s no Blocking or Throttling Rules"

The EU published a document presenting the agreement reached over Net Neutrality:

"The rules enshrine the principle of net neutrality into EU law: no blocking or throttling of online content, applications and services. It means that there will be truly common EU-wide Internet rules, contributing to a single market and reversing current fragmentation.

The basics:

• Every European must be able to have access to the open Internet and all content and service providers must be able to provide their services via a high-quality open Internet.
   
• All traffic will be treated equally. This means, for example, that there can be no paid prioritisation of traffic in the Internet access service. At the same time, equal treatment allows reasonable day-to-day traffic management according to justified technical requirements, and which must be independent of the origin or destination of the traffic". 

Yet,

• "The rules also enable continued network and service innovation by defining the principles underpinning the relationship between Internet access services and innovative services with specific quality requirements .. These are services like IPTV, high-definition videoconferencing or healthcare services like telesurgery"

However,

• Are we not promoting a two-tier Internet? No
   
• Zero rating ..  we have to make sure that commercial practices benefit users and do not in practice lead to situations where end-users' choice is significantly reduced. Regulatory authorities will therefore have to monitor and ensure compliance with the rules

See "Roaming charges and open Internet: questions and answers" - here.

Global Pressure on Net Neutrality

The endless delays in making the Net Neutrality laws in different, generated a new coalition - the "Global Net Neutrality Coalition". With 37 organizations from 19 countries, the coalition defines that "Net neutrality requires that the Internet be maintained as an open platform, on which network providers treat all content, applications and services equally, without discrimination". 

"This global coalition could not have come together at a more critical moment. In the U.S., net neutrality has finally become a kitchen-table topic, following President Obama’s breakthrough statement in which he called for the Federal Communications Commission to pass bold rules
protecting the open internet [see "What's Next for Net Neutrality?" - here] . Meanwhile, the European Union could soon pass landmark net neutrality legislation, with the Telecoms Single Market [here] proposal currently sitting with the Council of the European Union"

Members of the Global Net Neutrality Coalition:

Access (Global), Acceso Libre (Venezuela), ACUI (Colombia), Article 19 (Global), Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio & Communication (Bangladesh), Bits of Freedom (Netherlands), CC Meta (France), CELE (Argentina), Date Roads Foundation (US), Derechos Digitales (Chile), Digitale Gesselschaft (Germany), Digital Rights Foundation (Pakistan), EDRi (Europe), Electronic Frontier Foundation (Global), Free Press (US), Fundación vía Libre (Argentina), Internet Policy Observatory (Pakistan), Initiative für Netzfreiheit (Europe), Internet Ecosystem Alliance (Switzerland), IT for Change (India), Jinbonet (Korea), Just Net Coalition (Global), KiCTAnet (Kenya), La Quadrature du Net (France), Network Neutrality User Forum of Korea (Korea), OpenMedia International (Global), Paradigm Initiative (Nigeria), PEN International (Global), Public Knowledge (US), Open Technology Institute (US), Social Media Exchange (MENA), Software Freedom Law Center (US), Venezuela Inteligente (Venezuela), Web We Want (Global), Witness (Global).

See "Global coalition launches international net neutrality website" - here.

EU: One Step Away from A Strong Net Neutrality Law

The EU voted for a new Net Neutrality law (for fixed and mobile services), that should end traffic blocking (here) or discrimination. However, there are some exceptions, including the ability to provide high-quality services. This is not final yet, and the law has to be approved by the leaders of the EU countries.

"Internet access providers would be barred from blocking or slowing down selected services for economic or other reasons by the latest draft EU “telecoms package” legislation voted by Parliament on Thursday .. MEPs want clear rules to prevent internet access providers from promoting some services at the expense of others".

See also:

• EU: Traffic Management, Pay for QoS - are all fine! - here
• EU Tells Telcos to Wake-up! - here.

"Internet access providers would still be able to offer specialized services of higher quality, such as video on demand and business-critical data-intensive “cloud” (data storage) applications, so long as these services are not supplied to "the detriment of the availability or quality of internet access services" offered to other companies or service suppliers

MEPs shortened the European Commission's list of “exceptional” cases in which internet access providers could still be entitled to block or slow down the internet. MEPs say these practices should be permitted only to enforce a court order, preserve network security or prevent temporary network congestion. If such "traffic management measures" are used, they must be "transparent, non-discriminatory and proportionate" and "not be maintained longer than necessary", they add.

MEPs underline that internet access should be provided in accordance with the principle of "net neutrality", which means that all internet traffic is treated equally, without discrimination, restriction or interference, independently of its sender, recipient, type, content, device, service or application.
See "Ensure open access for internet service suppliers and ban roaming fees, say MEPs" - here.

EU Courts can Order ISPs to Block Copyright Infringement Sites

The EU's Advocate General’s Opinion says that ".. Member States are to ensure that copyright holders or holders of related rights are able to apply for an injunction against intermediaries whose services are used by a third party to infringe their rights .. It is already established that internet providers can in principle be regarded as intermediaries and therefore as persons against which such injunctions, which are aimed at bringing to an end infringements already committed and at preventing further infringements, can be granted. In practice, the operators of illegal websites and the internet providers which make them available online are frequently based outside Europe or conceal their identity, making it difficult to pursue them before the courts".

"In his Opinion today, Advocate General Pedro Cruz Villalón [pictured] takes the view that the internet provider of the user of a website which infringes copyright is also to be regarded as an intermediary whose services are used by a third party – that is the operator of the website - to infringe copyright and therefore also as a person against whom an injunction can be granted. That is apparent from the wording, context, spirit and purpose of the provision of EU law".

See also "There is always another Way to Download" - here.

See "According to Advocate General Cruz Villalón an internet provider can be required to block access by its customers to a website which infringes copyright" - here.

EU Checks DT, Orange and Telefonica Use of DPI for Traffic Discrimination

It's action time for the EU!

While its stand on Net Neutrality is not clear (see "EU: Traffic Management, Pay for QoS - are all fine!" - here Vs. "What does the EU Want to Know about Traffic Management?" - here) it decided not to wait any more and look for the use of DPI by leading carriers as a mean to discriminate services.
 
Jennifer Baker reports to Computerworld that the "The European Union's top antitrust watchdog has carried out unannounced raids on Telefonica, Deutsche Telecom and Orange. The European Commission is concerned that the three companies may have violated E.U. competition rules prohibiting the abuse of a dominant market position, it said Thursday .. The Commission is understood to be looking into network operators' use of deep packet inspection, a technique that allows them to identify the type of content that runs through their networks and allows them to throttle traffic from particularly demanding applications such as video streaming or VoIP calls".

An EU memo explains that "The European Commission can confirm that on 9 July 2013 Commission officials initiated unannounced inspections at the premises of a number of telecommunications companies active in the provision of Internet connectivity in several Member States" (here).

See "EU competition watchdog raids Telefonica, Deutsche Telecom and Orange" - here.

EU: Traffic Management, Pay for QoS - are all fine!

  

The Internet is a best-effort based system, unless you pay extra. That's within the definition of an open and neutral network, as long as it is transparent and competitive, says Neelie Kroes (pictured), Vice-President of the European Commission responsible for the Digital Agenda.

"The fact is, the online data explosion means networks are getting congested. Internet Service Providers (ISPs) need to invest in network capacity to meet rising demand: and the right predictable regulatory framework will help them do so. But, at peak times, traffic management will continue to play a role (see "What does the EU Want to Know about Traffic Management?" - here).

.. and indeed it can be for legitimate and objective reasons; like separating time-critical traffic from the less urgent .. Many ISPs already do manage traffic in that way, avoiding congestion and ensuring quality. Likewise, many ISPs protect their customers from spam – something which has made a real positive difference, which I'd say most users find helpful, and are happy with".

"An open platform is built on competition, innovation transparency, and choice

• For example, if you've just bought a videoconferencing system, you'll probably also want an internet service that guarantees the right quality, end-to-end. If someone wants to pay extra for that, no EU rules should stand in their way; it's not my job to ban people from buying those services, nor to prevent people providing them. If you don't want to buy them that is also fine, and you should absolutely continue to benefit from the "best efforts internet".
   
• We must ensure transparency. Before you sign up to an internet contract, you want to know key details (see "EU: Net Neutrality is about Transparency; Favor of Parental Control" - here)
   
• People need choice in their internet services. A real choice, not a theoretical one. If they want to switch providers, they should be able to do so, without countless obstructions" (see "EU Tells Telcos to Wake-up!" - here)
   
• Innovation also needs competition. Services like Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) or messaging services – like Skype or WhatsApp – offer real innovation for consumers. But some ISPs deliberately degrade those services, or block them outright, simply to avoid the competition (see "EU: "It's not OK for Skype and other such services to be throttled" - here)

See "The EU, safeguarding the open internet for all" - here.

EU Tells Telcos to Wake-up!

Neelie Kroes (pictured),Vice-President of the European Commission, leads the Net work Neutrality agenda in the EU (see "EU: 'It's not OK for Skype and other such services to be throttled'" - here and "EU: Net Neutrality is about Transparency" - here).

  

Today Ms. Kores Tweeted the following -  "It's official: chat apps have overtaken SMS globally. The cash cow is dying. Time for telcos to wake up & smell the data coffee". 

  

What should be telcos be doing, while maintaining Network Neutrality? 

Safer Internet Day - Operators can Help!

Today, February 5th, is the Safer Internet Day (SID) - "organised by Insafe in February of each year to promote safer and more responsible use of online technology and mobile phones, especially amongst children and young people across the world" (here).

See also "EU: Net Neutrality is about Transparency; Favor of Parental Control" - here and "Deutsche Telekom Group supports Child Online Safety Initiative" - here.

The above statement from DT shows that operators may help parents make the internet safer for children. For example, they may provide network based parental control services. There is even a revenue opportunity associated with the service.

During the years, I covered several such deployments as you may see in the following table (taken from my recent report - "The Broadband Traffic Management 2013 Deployments Directory", available here.

Operator	Country	Type	Vendor	System	Post
Virgin Mobile	France	Mobile	Optenet	Parental Control	http://broabandtrafficmanagement.blogspot.com/2012/12/parental-control-deployments209.html
Coriolis	France	Mobile	Optenet	Parental Control	http://broabandtrafficmanagement.blogspot.com/2012/12/parental-control-deployments209.html
China Telecom	China	Mobile	Live Mobile	Parental Control	http://broabandtrafficmanagement.blogspot.com/2012/11/parental-control-deployments-201-china.html
ETB	Colombia	Fixed	Optenet	Parental Control	http://broabandtrafficmanagement.blogspot.com/2012/09/parental-controlcontent-security.html
SFR	France	Mobile	Optenet	Parental Control	http://broabandtrafficmanagement.blogspot.com/2012/07/parental-control-deployments-161-sfr.html
VimpelCom	Russia	ISP	Symantec Corporation	Parental Control	http://broabandtrafficmanagement.blogspot.com/2012/03/vassecurity-deployments-135-vimpelcom.html
Sri Lanka Telecom	Sri Lanka	Fixed	Opetnet	Parental Control	http://broabandtrafficmanagement.blogspot.com/2012/03/vassecurity-deployments-132-sri-lanka.html
StarHub	Singapore	Mobile	Mobixell Networks	Parental Control	http://broabandtrafficmanagement.blogspot.com/2012/02/tmsecurity-deployments-122-starhub.html
MTN	Nigeria	Mobile	AdaptiveMobile	Parental Control	http://broabandtrafficmanagement.blogspot.com/2011/11/dpisecurity-deployments-102-mtn-nigeria.html
Turkcell Superonline	Turkey	Mobile	Optenet	Parental Control	http://broabandtrafficmanagement.blogspot.com/2011/07/dpi-deployments-80-turkcelturkcell.html
Turkcell	Turkey	Mobile	Optenet	Parental Control	http://broabandtrafficmanagement.blogspot.com/2011/07/dpi-deployments-80-turkcelturkcell.html
CyberOne	Australia	Cable	ContentKeeper Technologies	Parental Control	http://broabandtrafficmanagement.blogspot.com/2011/07/dpi-deployments-77-cyberone-australia.html
Vodafone	UK	Mobile	Blue Coat Systems	Parental Control	http://broabandtrafficmanagement.blogspot.com/2011/06/vodafone-uk-web-traffic-filtered-by.html
Vodafone	Turkey	Mobile	Optenet	Parental Control	http://broabandtrafficmanagement.blogspot.com/2011/06/dpi-deployments-74-vodafone-turkey-uses.html
NTT Plala	Japan	ISP	Cisco	Parental Control	http://broabandtrafficmanagement.blogspot.com/2011/06/dpi-deployments-73-ntt-plala-deploys.html
TalkTalk	UK	ISP	Huawei	Parental Control	http://broabandtrafficmanagement.blogspot.com/2011/05/dpi-deployments-68-talktalk-uk-launches.html
Amtrak	USA	Wi-Fi	N/A	Parental Control	http://broabandtrafficmanagement.blogspot.com/2010/09/dpiqos-deployments-26-amtrak-blocks.html

EU: Net Neutrality is about Transparency; Favor of Parental Control

 
Neelie KROES (pictured), VP of the European Commission, is a long time supporter of Net Neutrality (see "EU: 'It's not OK for Skype and other such services to be throttled'" - here).

In a recent post to her blog, she clarifies her position, and positions it around transparency, while allowing application-based tiered services:

  

"My general starting principle is that consumers should be free to make real choices about their internet subscription and online activity .. the public interest does not, in my view, preclude consumers from subscribing to more differentiated, limited internet offers, possibly for a lower price .. transparency and effective consumer control will nearly always be part of the solution"
  

".. On net neutrality, consumers need effective choice on the type of internet subscription they sign up to. That means real clarity, in non-technical language. About effective speeds in normal conditions, and about any restrictions imposed on traffic – and a realistic option to switch to a “full” service, without such restrictions, offered by their own provider or another. Ensuring consumer choice can mean constraints on others – in this case, an obligation for all internet service providers to offer an accessible “full” option to their customers. But such choice should also drive innovation and investment by internet providers, with benefits for all. I am preparing a Commission initiative to secure this effective consumer choice in Europe"

  

Ms Kroes also supports parental control service by ISPs - "Is there a public interest in parents having effective tools to control the material their young children can access online? Most would say yes, and the EU shares this view"

See "Internet and filtering applications: a tale of choice and revenues" - here.

BEREC: “What regulators can do in order to promote net neutrality?”

The Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) found in May that "traffic management and differentiation practices are capable of being used for questionable purposes" (here).

Concluding that this is a bad thing, and Network Neutrality may help avoid such behavior, BEREC published several suggestions to regulators on how to promote Net Neutrality.

BEREC announced it has "..adopted an Overview and a Summary of BEREC’s approach to net neutrality at the BEREC Plenary on 6 December 2012 .. The Overview provides a concise description of three years of BEREC’s activities in the field of net neutrality. It summarizes briefly how the Internet works and presents findings related to retail and wholesale relationships and observations in the context of net neutrality. Furthermore, the paper presents what regulators can do in order to promote net neutrality. More specific explanations are available in the “Summary of BEREC positions on net neutrality”.

The "Overview of BEREC’s approach to net neutrality" (here) lists "What regulators can do in order to promote net neutrality": 

• Strengthening competition - Regulators have powers under the regulatory framework to promote effective competition through the imposition of price, access and non-discrimination obligations on operators .. Transparency (of terms and conditions) is necessary in order for competition to effectively discipline market players in this way – end-users must have access to information about available offers on the market, so that they can identify unrestricted Internet access service offers (providing access to all applications available on the Internet) as well as any limitations that apply to restricted offers ..
   
• Monitoring - . .. regulators continuously monitor the quality of Internet offers on the market, as well as the evolution of the market as a whole.
   
• Using additional powers, e.g. on quality of service, when necessary .. These requirements could take the form of minimum statistical QoS levels (where an Internet access service is being degraded) and/or a prohibition on blocking and throttling (where a particular application is being throttled or blocked). In either case, BEREC believes this power should be used with caution, and typically only where other regulatory tools are unable to make a sufficient impact quickly enough.

See "BEREC has adopted two summaries and the updated reports on net neutrality" - here.

The EU Views on Net Neutrality for the Coming ITU Meeting

      

While ISPs in EU countries are using traffic shaping and DPI (see "BEREC: 'traffic management and differentiation practices are capable of being used for questionable purposes'" - here and "BEREC: Blocking/throttling P2P and VoIP with DPI is Frequently Done in Europe" - here) the European Parliament thinks that the world should be a better place, and expects the UN to lead that.

The Parliament published a decision related to the coming ITU meeting in Dubai from 3 to 14 December 2012, in view of its "resolution on the open internet and net neutrality in Europe" [see "EU is Getting Closer to Net Neutrality" - here].

Among other things:

• Calls on the Council and the Commission to ensure that any changes to the International Telecommunication Regulations are compatible with the EU acquis and further the Union’s objective of, and interest in, advancing the internet as a truly public place ..
   
• Believes that the ITU, or any other single, centralised international institution, is not the appropriate body to assert regulatory authority over either internet governance or internet traffic flows ..
   
• Is concerned that the ITU reform proposals include the establishment of new profit mechanisms that could seriously threaten the open and competitive nature of the internet, driving up prices, hampering innovation and limiting access; recalls that the internet should remain free and open; See "European ISPs Suggest New Internet Business Models" - here and  "ITU to Review QoS and Traffic Management vs. Net Neutrality" - here. 

See "European Parliament resolution on the forthcoming World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT-2012) of the International Telecommunications Union, and the possible expansion of the scope of international telecommunication regulations" - here.

Tango Telecom's Policy Manager Helps MNOs to Retain Roamers

Tango Telecom announced that its "Local Breakout solution will comprehensively and cost-effectively enable operators to comply with the EU Roaming Regulation  due to come into effect in July 2014".

"The new regulation [see "Council adopts new roaming rules" - here] will allow intra-European Union roamers to purchase their roaming service from a different provider to their home network service. Tango Telecom’s Local Breakout solution (LBO), which is based on its Policy Control platform, ensures that operators will be able to attract and retain valuable roamers to their networks by offering international data roaming at local data access rates"

Dr. Colm Ward, CEO, Tango Telecom, said: “We know that currently over 60% of smartphone and tablet roamers do not turn on mobile data access when roaming and that the 40% of roamers who do access data use significantly less than at home. This means that the impending EU regulation is an opportunity for operators to benefit from the huge untapped revenue potential of the data roamer. Rather than wait until 2014, operators should look to seize advantage now by being first to market. There is a very compelling business case”.

See "Tango Telecom provides operators with comprehensive solution to pending EU Roaming Regulation" - here.

What does the EU Want to Know about Traffic Management?

  

The European Commission launched a public consultation " .. seeking answers to questions on transparency, switching and certain aspects of internet traffic management, with a view to its commitment to preserve the open and neutral character of the Internet. These questions have emerged as key issues in the "net neutrality" debate that has taken place in Europe over the past years, including the recent findings of the Body of European Regulators of European Communications (BEREC)".

See "BEREC: 'traffic management and differentiation practices are capable of being used for questionable purposes'" - here.

Neelie Kroes (pictured; see "It's not OK for Skype and other such services to be throttled" - here), European Commission VP said: "Today there is a lack of effective consumer choice when it comes to internet offers. I will use this consultation to help prepare recommendations that will generate more real choices and end the net neutrality waiting game in Europe. Input from this consultation will help turn BEREC's findings into practical recommendations".

Some examples for questions that are part of the consultation (here):  

• Please explain briefly which traffic management techniques are usually applied by network operators or ISPs and how they are technically implemented
   
• If possible, please provide a  definition and  examples of  genuine congestion management measures, i.e. measures which are  necessary to  avoid or  tackle  network congestion, as  opposed to measures which may be called congestion management  but actually pursue other purpose
   
• Please give examples of "new business models" which could be developed on the basis of managed services (see "European ISPs Suggest New Internet Business Models"- here) 
   
• It appears that the implementation of traffic management measures requires ISPs to analyse certain information  about individual data packets, for instance by deep packet inspection (DPI) techniques. 

• Please explain which type of information needs to be read by ISPs to implement the different traffic management measures. In which layer can this information normally be found?
   
• Are there any privacy risks arising from the use of DPI for traffic management purposes, and, if so, what are the implications for transparency and consumer protection?
   
• Some ISPs currently apply 'fair use policies', which give them wide discretion to apply restrictions on traffic generated by users whose usage they consider excessive. Do you consider that, in case of contractual restrictions of data consumption, quantified data allowances (e.g. monthly caps of x MB or GB) are more transparent for consumers than discretionary fair use clauses?

See "Digital Agenda: Commission opens public consultation on preservation of the open internet (net neutrality)" - here and here.

European ISPs Suggest New Internet Business Models

Leading European ISPs said, more than once, that they wish to charge OTT content providers for delivering their content to subscribers, which may not match the ideas behind net neutrality (see "European Telcos do not Like Regulation and OTT!" - here; "European Carriers Ask [Again] to Charge Content Providers [Google]" - here and statements from DT, Telecom Italia).

So it is no longer just statements given to the press. ETNO,  an organization that represent 41 ISPs (including Belgacom, KPN, Orange, Telecom Italia, Telenor, swisscom, and Telefonica), submitted a proposal to the ITU "for changes to the ITRs providing for a new sustainable model for the Internet based on commercial agreements between undertakings".

  

"This contribution calls for a new IP interconnection ecosystem that provides end-to-end Quality of Service delivery, in addition to best effort delivery, enabling:

• the provision of value-added network services, to both end-customers and over the top (OTT) players and content providers, and
   
• a reflection of the value of traffic delivery over network infrastructures.

Moreover, the contribution states that in order to ensure an adequate return on investment in high bandwidth infrastructures, operating agencies shall negotiate commercial agreements to achieve a sustainable system of fair compensation for telecommunications services.

By endorsing the concept of “quality based delivery”, it will be possible to establish new interconnection policies based on the “value” of the traffic (not only on the “volume”), enabling new business models and implementing an ecosystem where operators’ revenues will not be disconnected from the investment needs made necessary by the rapid growth of Internet traffic". 

See also BEREC: "traffic management and differentiation practices are capable of being used for questionable purposes" - here.

See "ETNO proposes a number of changes to selected articles of the ITRs, in view of the WCIT (World Conference on International Telecommunications)" - here and the proposal text - here. 

Tangoe Supports EU's Bill Shock Prevention Rules

Tangoe announced "..solution support for recent EU roaming rules designed to address the issue of mobile "bill shock." Tangoe's comprehensive CLM solutions, including Real-Time Telecom Expense Management (rTEM), provide visibility and control of mobile expenses for carriers and businesses, enabling compliance with the European Parliament's regulations regarding roaming on public mobile telephone networks and other potential regulations by government agencies around the world"

".. Tangoe's rTEM bill shock solution is available to carriers in Canada, Australia, and Latin America. Tangoe helps carriers to eliminate barriers of adoption of mobile broadband solutions by offering tools that proactively alert users to device data, voice, SMS, and roaming consumption, as well as usage anomalies. In addition to real-time capabilities, Tangoe rTEM provides predictive analytics as well as visibility and control over mobile usage and associated costs. This helps individuals and businesses avoid excessive charges before they are incurred"

See "Tangoe Solution Enables Mobile Carriers and Their Customers to Eliminate Bill Shock" - here.

BEREC: "traffic management and differentiation practices are capable of being used for questionable purposes"

     

The Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) published ".. the results of an investigation into traffic management and other practices resulting in restrictions to the open Internet in Europe". (for background see "The EU Takes its time with Net Neutrality: It is Important, but Let's Monitor and Study First" - here and "BEREC: Blocking/throttling P2P and VoIP with DPI is Frequently Done in Europe" - here).

"The total number of operators considered within the scope of the exercise is 381 - 266 fixed and 115 mobile operators .. The customer base of the respondent operators covers a total of about 140 million fixed broadband subscribers and 200 million mobile active Internet subscribers".

The traffic restrictions reported by the operators are divided into 4 categories:

1. P2P/VoIP and Other contents/applications (e.g. file sharing, FTP, etc.)
    
2. Measures reported by operators as allowing a more efficient protection and management of networks - Congestion management and Security and integrity 
    
3. Measures put in place by operators in order to implement specific business models, either concerning the bundling of specialized services with Internet access, or with respect to data volume pricing - Specialised services in fixed networks and Data caps
    
4. Restriction that is not at the operators’ initiative, but is required by public authorities (measures upon legal order)

BEREC concludes:

• Competition is expected to discipline operators, and ensure the best offers for consumers, but this critically relies on effective transparency and the ability of endusers to easily switch service providers.
    
• Both NRAs and end users should be able to monitor the performance of the Internet access service, and of the applications used via that Internet access service.
   
• Where competition and transparency are inadequate or insufficient to address concerns, existing regulatory tools (including quality of service requirements) should enable NRAs to address net neutrality related concerns for the time being (though not all of these tools have been fully tested yet). NRAs are ready to act without hesitation  if necessary.

See the press release "BEREC publishes net neutrality findings and new guidance for consultation"- here and report - here.

BEREC: Blocking/throttling P2P and VoIP with DPI is Frequently Done in Europe

  

Back in December, the EU TRANSPORT, TELECOMMUNICATIONS and ENERGY Council published a document summarizing its current work and consolations on Net Neutrality (see "The EU Takes its time with Net Neutrality: It is Important, but Let's Monitor and Study First" - here).

  

One of the action items was to "Monitor, jointly with BEREC, the issue of traffic management to allow for a smooth flow of proportional, necessary and transparent traffic management practices that do not affect net neutrality" and "Continue studying, with the support of BEREC's investigations, any aspects of net neutrality where significant and persistent problems are substantiated, including charges and conditions that mobile operators impose on VoIP users as well as throttling of content, applications and services".

Now, BEREC, the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications, announced that it ".. has submitted to the Commission its preliminary findings on reported Internet traffic management practices, following a Europe-wide data collection exercise launched jointly with the Commission in December 2011".

"The most frequently reported traffic management practices are the blocking and/or throttling of peer to-peer (P2P) traffic, on both fixed and mobile networks, and the blocking of Voice over IP (VoIP) traffic (mostly on mobile networks, usually based on specific contract terms). When blocking/throttling is implemented in the network, it is typically done through deep packet inspection (DPI) .. BEREC also found a wide variety of data caps and “fair use” practices - these were not the main focus of its investigation, since (with some exceptions) in general they do not imply differentiated treatment of traffic"

"About one quarter of respondents provide justifications for certain traffic management practices based on what could be described as “security and integrity” concerns".

See "BEREC preliminary findings on traffic management practices in Europe show that blocking of VoIP and P2P traffic is common, other practices vary widely" - here.

The EU Takes its time with Net Neutrality: It is Important, but Let's Monitor and Study First

The EU's TRANSPORT, TELECOMMUNICATIONS and ENERGY Council published a document summarizing its current work and consolations on Open Internet (Net Neutrality). Not for the first time (here), the EU does not see an urgent need to do something, despite the concerns presented.
   

Among other things, the council says that:

• It recognizes the "The importance of preserving the open character of the Internet" and "The need to encourage investment in new network infrastructures by both the public and private sector"
   
• It notes the "The existence of some concerns, in regards to Discriminatory forms of traffic management and treatment of data, in particular throttling of data and blocking of content, applications and services", "Price transparency and quality of service, in particular the discrepancy between advertised and actual delivery speeds for an Internet connection"  and "Network congestion, mainly as a result of growing data streams"
   
• It underlines the "The importance of ensuring efficient transparency" [here] and "The importance of addressing the issues of discrimination and degradation of service that may arise from certain traffic management practices"
   
• And it invites the Commission to "Monitor, jointly with BEREC, the issue of traffic management to allow for a smooth flow of proportional, necessary and transparent traffic management practices that do not affect net neutrality" and "Continue studying, with the support of BEREC's investigations, any aspects of net neutrality where significant and persistent problems are substantiated, including charges and conditions that mobile operators impose on VoIP users as well as throttling of content, applications and services"

See "Council conclusions on the open internet and net neutrality in Europe" - here.

EU is Getting Closer to Net Neutrality

 

La Quadrature Du Net reports that "The “Industry” Committee of the EU Parliament unanimously adopted a resolution on Net neutrality .. The text adopted today in the ITRE committee vote will now move to be adopted in plenary without the possibility of further amendments, in a vote scheduled for late-November".

• The text is a strong political statement in favour of Net neutrality. It brings a useful definition of Net neutrality and of the network management policies that are detrimental to the users' freedoms and to competition. 

• The resolution asks the Commission to move past its failed “wait-and-see” [see "EU Net Neutrality Study Recommends: "Do not impose any further NN obligations" - here] approach by assessing the need for further regulation on Net neutrality, within 6 months of EU telecoms regulators (BEREC) releasing their study [see "Yet Another ISP Transparency Guide" - here] on the discriminatory practices of ISPs.

See "Net Neutrality Resolution Adopted in EU Parliament" - here.