Broadband Reply Comments

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

  • 8/9/2019 Broadband Reply Comments

    1/11

    1

    Before theFederal Communications Commission

    Washington, D.C. 20554

    In the Matter of ))Framework for Broadband Internet Services ) GN Docket No. 10-127

    )

    Reply Comments of the Writers Guild of America, West, Inc. (WGAW)

    David J. YoungExecutive DirectorWriters Guild of America, West, Inc.7000 West Third StreetLos Angeles, CA 90048(323) 782-4689

    August 12, 2010

  • 8/9/2019 Broadband Reply Comments

    2/11

  • 8/9/2019 Broadband Reply Comments

    3/11

    3

    growing range of services, content and applications. Consumers benefit from the increased

    choice created by the competitive forces of an open Internet.

    Guild members benefit from an open Internet both as content creators and consumers,

    who write and view news, commentary and entertainment, and participate in social networking.

    In addition to the benefits Internet freedom offers to our society, for content creators the Internet

    also represents an independent and competitive distribution platform. While television and film

    distribution is controlled by a handful of powerful media companies, the Internet offers a

    medium through which anyone with a story can find an audience. An open Internet protected by

    net neutrality will enhance job opportunities for Guild members and expand content offerings to

    consumers.

    Opposition to Common Carrier Status, is, in Effect, Opposition to Net Neutrality

    As outlined in our initial comments on this NOI and discussed in the separate submission

    of the Open Internet Coalition, the recent DC Circuit decision Comcast v. FCCmakes clear that

    the Commission will be unable to protect a free and open Internet by relying on Title I ancillary

    authority. It is therefore necessary for the FCC to reclassify broadband transmission as a

    telecommunications service subject to regulation under Title II in order to enforce net

    neutrality. We respectfully disagree with the Industry Guilds that a non-common carrier

    approach will allow the Internet to remain a free and open platform that promotes innovation,

    investment, competition, and users interests.

    1

    Further attempts by the Commission to rely on

    ancillary authority under Title I to protect a free and open Internet will inevitably be met with

    continued legal resistance and will prolong regulatory uncertainty.

    1See Comments of AFTRA, et al., In the Matter of a Framework for Broadband Internet Services, GN Docket No.

    10-127, p. 9.

  • 8/9/2019 Broadband Reply Comments

    4/11

    4

    The WGAW rejects the argument that the exercise of regulatory authority under Title II

    will inhibit efforts to control piracy and other illegal behavior online. Reclassification of the

    broadband transmission component under Title II and application of the principle of

    nondiscrimination embodied in Section 202 will not hinder efforts to address unlawful content or

    the unlawful transmission of content online. As the FCC has made clear in the six principles it

    outlined in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on Preserving the Open Internet, net

    neutrality rules will only apply to lawful content, applications and services. While the trafficking

    of pirated content online is of vital concern to all who work in the entertainment industry, piracy

    can and must be addressed while still protecting net neutrality.

    Preventing Piracy is Necessary to Protect the Jobs and Income of WGAW Members

    In comments filed with the Commission, the Industry Guilds and the MPAA have

    elaborated on the impact of Internet piracy on the health of the entertainment industry. The

    Guild concurs on the importance of protecting intellectual property, and has said so publically.2

    Like the other Industry Guilds, the WGAW has a substantial interest in the protection of

    copyrighted works. Guild members rely on residuals deferred compensation based on the

    continuing use of creative works as a form of compensation. In 2008, professional writers

    represented by the WGAW received over $1 billion in income. Of this total, $286 million came

    in the form of residual payments for the reuse of original material on DVD, in international sales,

    syndicated on broadcast and cable channels, sold on iTunes, streamed online and viewed in many

    other markets. These residual payments constitute approximately 25% of total writer

    compensation. Residual payments have continued to grow, increasing approximately 5% per

    2See Comments of WGAW In the Matter of Preserving an Open Internet (GN Docket No 09-191) /Broadband

    Industry Practices (WC Docket No 07-52), pp. 9-10.

  • 8/9/2019 Broadband Reply Comments

    5/11

    5

    year over the last five years. The growth in residuals demonstrates the long term value that

    copyrighted works create and the importance that preventing copyright theft has for the entire

    entertainment community.

    Residual payments derived from the reuse of content sustain careers and support industry

    health and pension plans. These payments in effect serve as R&D for the entertainment industry,

    allowing writers to develop new material while waiting for their next employment opportunity.

    Any devaluation of copyrighted content could significantly diminish the ability of writers to

    spend time developing new content. Strong enforcement of copyright law benefits society as

    well. The ability to generate revenue through the exploitation of intellectual property provides

    funds that can be reinvested and fuel further innovation in many industries, including

    entertainment. Piracy threatens the ability to sustain and develop content.

    Preservation of the Open Internet and Copyright Protection are Both Essential Objectives;

    Neither Can Be Sacrificed to Achieve the Other

    While we agree about the importance of copyright protection and the need to prevent piracy,

    we differ from the MPAA and Industry Guilds about solutions. The WGAW firmly believes in

    the need to balance these solutions with the preservation of an open, competitive Internet and

    protection of consumers right to access the lawful content, services and applications of their

    choice. Achieving this balance requires the creation of guiding principles for the development of

    piracy detection and prevention tools that do not infringe on free speech and the right to privacy.

    Specifically, piracy detection and prevention tools must be carefully designed to respect both the

    First and Fourth Amendments and not be used as a means for effectively creating an unfair

    advantage for large media companies.

  • 8/9/2019 Broadband Reply Comments

    6/11

    6

    Network Management Practices Must Be Carefully Balanced, Transparent and

    Constitutional

    The WGAW, along with the MPAA and the Industry Guilds, has supported the FCCs

    proposal to allow ISPs to address unlawful content through reasonable network management

    practices. The question of what constitutes a reasonable practice, however, is where the debate

    lies.

    The Industry Guilds have advocated a rule that allows for comprehensive screening for

    unlawful content. They define screening as the deployment of technologies to detect, monitor

    and filter traffic or specific files based on analysis of information such as protocols, file types,

    text descriptions, metadata, file size and other external information.3

    While the WGAW

    supports the denial of access to infringers, any rule permitting screening must (1) be carefully

    crafted to balance the interests of all Internet stakeholders, not just major content producers or

    ISPs; (2) be consistent with Constitutional norms; and (3) require transparency and public

    disclosure of all network management practices.

    We are particularly concerned with the effects of unregulated content screening. There is

    a danger that content from unknown sources, while still being legal, may be slowed or blocked

    by such a filtering process. The result could be that Hulu.com or other sites programmed by

    media companies load quickly while new sites created by independent producers are caught by

    this filtering system. Some may argue that this delay is a necessary step in addressing piracy, but

    it creates a significant competitive disadvantage for new entrants. Legitimate sites will lose

    viewers if content buffers or refuses to load because it is being screened.

    3See Comments of AFTRA et al. In the Matter of Preserving the Open Internet, GN Docket No. 09-191, Broadband

    Industry Practices, WC Docket No. 07-52, pp. 6.

  • 8/9/2019 Broadband Reply Comments

    7/11

    7

    Network management practices should not be allowed to create a de facto fast lane for

    large content producers. Tools like Deep Packet Inspection (DPI), which allow ISPs to look into

    packets to identify the data being transmitted, raise both privacy concerns and the potential for

    abuse. DPI would enable ISPs to favor certain content and frustrate other content, all in real

    time. Under the guise of network management, we could experience commercially motivated

    censorship. We must look to other tools to address piracy rather than choose ones that eliminate

    privacy and permit ISPs to provide preferential treatment to the content it chooses.

    A Fair Graduated Response Policy Would Address Piracy Without Interfering With

    Internet Traffic

    In its previous filings with the Commission, the WGAW has supported a graduated

    response regime as a means of combating piracy. Anecdotally, the WGAW has heard from at

    least one American ISP that the current graduated response techniques provided for in the Digital

    Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) have proved effective in stopping piracy. During an FCC

    Workshop on the Role of Content in the Broadband Ecosystem, a representative for the advocacy

    organization Public Knowledge cited a February 2009 presentation by Preston Padden of

    ABC/Disney at the Silicon Flatirons Conference in Colorado where Mr. Padden said that eighty

    percent of the time when people get notices from ISPs saying I know what youre doing, stop it

    they stop it.4

    Graduated response is an effective tool because it gives rights holders remedies against

    those who pirate content and mandates strong penalties for habitual lawbreakers without

    interfering with the flow of traffic over the Internet. A mature graduated response regime should

    4 See Transcript, Federal Communications Commission Workshop on the Role of Content in the BroadbandEcosystem, p. 65.

  • 8/9/2019 Broadband Reply Comments

    8/11

    8

    be characterized by fair and efficient adjudicative processes, accompanied by escalating

    penalties. Strong measures, such as terminating the Internet connections of chronic thieves,

    would seriously diminish the amount of pirated content on American networks. Critical to these

    measures is the need for due process to ensure that legal rights are protected. Similar to the

    Notice and Takedown procedure of the DMCA, there must be means for those accused of piracy

    to respond. In accordance with an open and transparent Internet, ISPs should be required to

    inform the FCC and consumers when they engage in graduated response. This will create a

    system of accountability for ISPs, providing a check against abusive behavior.

    ISP Surveillance of All Internet Traffic Cannot Be Justified in Light of the Availability of

    Less Intrusive Means to Combat Piracy

    The WGAW is confident that a free and open Internet, governed by net neutrality principles,

    can coexist alongside strong copyright enforcement. We are actively involved through the

    Copyright Alliance and other efforts in supporting both governmental and nongovernmental

    efforts to reduce copyright infringement. The Obama Administration has made clear the

    importance of protecting intellectual property and has initiated a vigorous and extensive program

    to prevent and punish online piracy. The WGAW supports the Intellectual Property Enforcement

    Coordinators (IPEC) multifaceted Joint Strategic Plan to combat online piracy. The Plan

    advocates transparency in developing and implementing policies; ensuring coordination among

    the private sector and enforcement agencies at the state, federal and international levels; and

    collecting data to understand the full extent of intellectual property infringement. The IPEC plan

    is of critical importance because of its ability to address the international scope of piracy, where

    a significant portion of offending businesses and websites operate.

  • 8/9/2019 Broadband Reply Comments

    9/11

    9

    One of the IPECs objectives is to strengthen U.S. intellectual property law enforcement.

    Just last month, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials disabled nine

    websites that hosted infringing content as part of a new initiativeOperation In Our Sitesto

    combat Internet counterfeiting and piracy. Authorities executed seizure warrants against nine

    domain names that offer illegal versions of newly released feature films, including

    TVSHACK.NET, MOVIES-LINKS.TV, FILESPUMP.COM, NOW-MOVIES.COM,

    PLANETMOVIEZ.COM, THEPIRATECITY.ORG, and ZML.COM, many of which generate

    revenue from donations and advertising. Agents from ICE's Homeland Security Investigations

    (HSI) were also able to seize the criminals assets from 15 bank, Paypal, investment and

    advertising accounts, and executed four residential search warrants in several states. The

    WGAW supports the strengthening of U.S. enforcement agencies that engage in thorough and

    transparent investigations to combat online piracy. These actions raise the profile of copyright

    enforcement without sacrificing Internet freedom.

    Another important component of the IPEC plan is coordination of anti-piracy efforts. The

    plan encourages content owners, ISPs, advertising brokers, payment processors and search

    engines to collaborate on efforts to combat piracy. The WGAW supports the inclusion of ad

    brokers and payment processors such as credit card companies in anti-piracy efforts. Many sites

    that stream illegal content rely on revenue from advertisers and payment processors. In fact,

    many consumers cannot differentiate between legal and illegal sites because they can purchase

    the infringing content using a credit card. If these revenue sources were cut off, many of these

    sites would cease to exist. The IPECs effort to include these entities in its voluntary anti-piracy

    response represents a creative development in the war against copyright infringement, but

    legislation may be required to compel participation by these entities.

  • 8/9/2019 Broadband Reply Comments

    10/11

    10

    The MPAAs Proposed Innovative Business Arrangements Threaten to Undermine Net

    Neutrality and Disadvantage Competition

    In its comments to the FCC, the MPAA has repeatedly advocated what could amount to a

    blanket dispensation from net neutrality rules. The MPAA has asked the Commission to make

    clear that content owners will have the flexibility to enter into innovative business arrangements

    with broadband providers.5

    While it is not clear what kind of innovative arrangements the

    MPAA is talking about, we are concerned that, under the guise of providing high quality of

    service to consumers, the dominant media companies want the ability to create a preferential lane

    for Internet traffic, in derogation of the most basic net neutrality principles. The ability to

    negotiate for preferential treatment is inimical to the free movement of Internet traffic.

    According to Morgan Stanley Research, 82 percent of the 2009 prime time 18-49 ratings share is

    controlled by 7 companies.6 These companies seek to replicate a similar level of control on the

    Internet and may well use these business arrangements to achieve this goal. While much of

    the content that the MPAA would exhibit using these business arrangements would be written by

    WGAW members, we oppose providing an unfair competitive advantage to the major media

    companies over independent producers.

    Conclusion

    Content is why the Internet matters. The open and free flow of content on the Internet must

    be preserved to protect the public interest in free speech, privacy and fair competition. But

    piracy threatens the availability and viability of that content. However, to meet that threat with a

    solution that itself threatens the free flow of content is to prescribe a cure worse than the disease.

    5See Comments of The Motion Picture Association of America, In the Matter of a Framework for Broadband

    Internet Services, GN Docket No. 10-127, pp. 6.6 Morgan Stanley Research, Nice View from the Couch: 2Q10 Preview, July 26, 2010, pp.3.

  • 8/9/2019 Broadband Reply Comments

    11/11

    11

    The FCC should therefore craft rules that require ISPs to police piracy, but with techniques that

    do not infringe on openness, do not create barriers to entry, and do not disadvantage independent

    producers as they compete for viewers with billion-dollar companies. We are confident that

    reclassification of broadband transmission under Title II will allow the FCC to institute network

    neutrality rules. In addition, the six net neutrality principles outlined by the FCC protect only

    lawful content, which will allow the government, private industry and Guilds to work

    collaboratively to develop tools to address piracy.