Top Senator Calls on Comcast to Extend Net Neutrality Pledge

Sen. Patrick Leahy, the influential Vermont Democrat and chairman of the Judiciary Committee, has called on Comcast to extend its commitment to net neutrality "well beyond" 2018, when the company's current pledge expires.

Leahy is also asking the cable giant to foreswear "paid prioritization," which many Open Internet advocates argue would create fast and slow "lanes" on the internet, threatening its status as a free and open platform and an engine for innovation and economic growth.

In a letter to Comcast executive vice president David L. Cohen, Leahy made a direct connection between Comcast's proposed $45 billion purchase of Time Warner Cable and net neutrality, the principle that broadband providers should treat all data equally.

Leahy's letter could increase the pressure on the Federal Communications Commission, which is evaluating whether the proposed merger advances the public interest, to require Comcast to make a strong net neutrality commitment as part of the deal.

It also demonstrates how closely net neutrality is intertwined with concerns over consolidation in the broadband industry. Comcast and Time Warner Cable are the two largest cable companies in the country, and a union between them would create a broadband colossus with immense market power.

As part of its intense lobbying campaign pushing the Time Warner Cable deal, Comcast has repeatedly emphasized that it "supports an open internet and network neutrality." As part of its 2010 acquisition of NBCUniversal, Comcast pledged to abide by the net neutrality provisions of the FCC's now-defunct 2010 Open Internet order, which was struck down by a federal court in January.

Leahy also asked Comcast to pledge "not to engage in any activity that prioritizes affiliated content or services over unaffiliated content or services, helping to ensure that vertical integration does not threaten competition online."

Although Leahy is not part of the Time Warner Cable merger review process, it's entirely possible that such conditions will be baked into federal approval of the deal, which is being scrutinized by the Justice Department as well as the FCC.

"Paid prioritization" refers to a commercial arrangement in which a deep-pocketed internet content or service company pays a broadband provider like Comcast for preferential treatment on its network. Net neutrality advocates argue that such arrangements could put startups at a disadvantage, threatening the emergence of the next YouTube, Netflix, or Skype.

FCC chairman Tom Wheeler has proposed new Open Internet rules that critics say would open the door to paid prioritization. Wheeler's proposal sparked a massive backlash that led to a record-breaking 3.7 million public comments to the agency, most of them supporting tough new rules that would require the FCC to reclassify broadband service under the common carrier provisions of Title II of the Communications Act.

Comcast and other big broadband providers, along with their lobbyists and allies on Capitol Hill, vigorously oppose such reclassification. As a result, Wheeler and his FCC colleagues are facing a tough choice. If the FCC does decide to reclassify broadband under Title II, the agency would face a ferocious political battle and the likelihood of litigation.

Earlier this month, President Obama issued a strong statement opposing paid prioritization and warning of the consequences of allowing the Internet to become a multi-tiered platform. Last week, Wheeler declared that he and Obama are in agreement on paid prioritization, despite that fact that Wheeler's proposal would allow such commercial arrangements.

Comcast insists that it supports net neutrality. "Comcast doesn't prioritize Internet traffic or have paid fast lanes, and we have no plans to do so," Cohen, Comcast's lead executive on the Time Warner Cable deal, wrote in a company blog post earlier this year.

Comcast argues that the Time Warner Cable deal would deliver significant consumer benefits, including faster internet service, increased innovation, and a much-needed injection of capital spending to boost urban and rural communications infrastructure. But critics say that the deal would harm the public interest by threatening industry competition, stifling innovation, and creating a corporate colossus with unprecedented "gatekeeper" power over broadband access in huge swaths of the country.

A Comcast spokesperson said the company has received Leahy's letter and is reviewing it.