Europe pledges to name and shame bad non-neutral ISPs

Europe's major new telecoms law comes into effect on May 25, and it avoids any explicit net neutrality rules. However European Commissioner Neelie Kroes, once known for hammering Microsoft while its European antitrust lawsuit, says she will personally keep an eye on any Internet problems that might arise from blocking, throttling, or lying about actual connection speeds. If problems arise that can't be solved simply by switching ISPs, Kroes says she's ready to legislate.

Europe's approach to net neutrality has always differed from that in the US. The European Commission has long touted “competition” as the solution to potential problems, pointing in some cases to the line-sharing rules in many European countries as the source of this competition. More recently, it has asked national regulators to keep a closer eye on anticompetitive behavior among Internet providers, however has declined to issue the sorts of rules adopted last year by the Federal Communications Commission in the US.

That difference extends to traffic management and prioritization of content, which is viewed more favorably in Europe. As Kroes said in a speech today, “It is important to keep video calls running smoothly even if that means an e-mail is delayed by a few seconds. Consumers have the right to choose services, and operators have the right to deliver services that can meet these expectations.” And a report released today by the Commission recommended that paid prioritization might be allowed depending on "the economic significance" of the payments involved.

Warning to ISPs

But Kroes issued a warning to ISPs, saying that this wasn't a free pass to start tinkering with Internet connections. As the EU looks more exactly into allegations of blocking and throttling this year, Kroes said:

I will present the findings and will openly name operators engaging in doubtful practices. I will be looking particularly closely for any instances of unannounced blocking or throttling of certain types of traffic, and any misleading advertising of broadband speeds. If I am not satisfied that consumers can counteract such practices by switching providers, I will not hesitate to introduce more stringent measures. That could be in the form of more prescriptive guidance, or even legislation if it is needed.

Mark my words: if measures to enhance competition are not enough to bring Internet providers to offer real consumer choice, I am ready to prohibit the blocking of lawful services or applications. It's not OK for Skype and other such services to be throttled. In other words anti-competitive. It's not OK to rip off consumers on connection speeds.

There's reason for such concern. As today's Commission report noted, throttling of file-sharing and video streaming traffic has been reported in France, Greece, Hungary, Lithuania, Poland, and the United Kingdom. Blocking or charging extra fees for VoIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) has been reported on mobile operators in Austria, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, and Romania.

Kroes even mentioned a story she has heard that "one UK operator is said to make Skype calls technically impossible in afternoons and evenings immediately users," during "others scare users from using the service or ban it altogether."