AzureusVuze

Today, the Future of the Internet was an omnipresent topic at the FCC Hearings on Network Management and P2P throttling, at the Harvard Law School, in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

I thought the FCC showed leadership, by organizing high-profile hearings, just 3 months after Vuze and various consumer groups filed petitions and complaints. Policy-makers, academics, network operators, and pioneer companies like Vuze got to offer their perspectives on what basic principles should guide the Evolution of the Internet.

Well, here’s my view of the world, based on today’s discussion. The Internet needs:
1) Uncompromised Openness,
2) Transparent, Undiscriminating Network Management Rules,
3) Oh, and err, bigger pipes.

There was overwhelming support for an Open Internet, like we know it today, and overwhelming concern around Comcast’s and other ISPs tinkering behind the scenes, attempting to block or slow certain protocols and applications, particularly P2P-based services like Vuze. Innovation created the Internet. Innovation evolves the Internet. For startups like Vuze and others, innovation means inventing new ways to consume an ever-richer menu of the digital content that people demand. If the Internet isn’t an open, level playing field, we just can’t effectively compete. As a 50 person company, located above a Chinese restaurant in Palo Alto (the old Facebook office!), we don’t have the resources that large corporations have, and yet it should be obvious by now that Internet startups innovate faster and better than incumbent, inventing and building services that consumers love.

Want us to keep it up? Keep it Open.

Everyone, including us, agreed today that reasonable network management is appropriate. It benefits all of us, companies and consumers alike. What we can’t tolerate is network management with no boundaries. Now, let’s define “reasonable”; it means transparent, undiscriminating, not anti-competitive. We simply cannot rely on bare assurances of good faith from Network Operators. In essence, Comcast said today “Don’t worry, we’ll take care of Vuze and others just fine”. Maybe, maybe not. Application providers like Vuze need specific disclosures on how network management practices are affecting their service, so that they can remain in control of the experience that consumers will ultimately hold us accountable for. Obviously, consumers also need clarity on what to expect from their Internet service provider, like “Nutrition Facts” for internet access.

Finally, selectively blocking certain types of protocols, like P2P is unacceptable. It unfairly (and unnecessarily) puts innovative services that people demand at a disadvantage. In a world where ISPs also use their own pipes to deliver their own content, these things could be a pretty big deal.

ISPs should stop complaining that consumers want more bandwidth, since that’s what they sell. That should be wonderful news for them, right? Network Operators (at least some) need to increase the capacity of their networks. There is no way around it. We see overwhelming demand for high-resolution (HD anyone?) video content that is, yes, bandwidth-intensive. Many people during the hearing referred to the US as a “third world country” when it comes to its Internet infrastructure. While that’s bit of an overstatement (not to mention insensitive, since poor countries have other priorities than broadband Internet), it’s definitely true that Old Europe and parts of Asia have done a much better job at investing into fast, P2P-friendly network infrastructures that do a better job meeting consumer demand for rich media services.

Overall, today could very well be a defining moment for the Internet, given the stakes. That will depend on the emergence of some pointed regulation, and on more cooperation between network operators and innovative service providers like Vuze. We’re happy to play our part.

Gilles.