Microsoft Corp. said yesterday that “more could be done” by the United States legislature to ensure Network Neutrality principles. The response comes after the software giant petitioned federal regulators for permission to ignore shareholder demands to explain its position on the issue.
Redmond, Wash.-based Microsoft pleaded to the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) to allow the exclusion of a proposal by the Free Enterprise Action Fund (FEAF) from its annual shareholders meeting, according to Reuters.
The proposal sought to force Microsoft to justify its stance on Net Neutrality, a concept that has won enormous support from grassroots organizations all over the country. Legislation protecting these ideals would block Internet service providers and network operators from establishing a tiered system similar to cable television.
Proponents of Net Neutrality fear telecommunications and cable giants would slow and degrade Internet content unless content providers paid for “fast lane” delivery. This would limit the ability of small businesses and nonprofit organizations to operate on the World Wide Web and give network operators the ability to block access to content.
The investors in FEAF own stock in Web companies, who oppose creating Internet choke points, as well as telecommunications companies, who say discrimination is necessary to preserve competition.
FEAF investors wanted to know why Microsoft would support “expanded government regulation of the Internet.” But Microsoft apparently does not want to explain its position at the shareholder meeting.
The company would not comment on shareholder resolutions, but Jack Krumholtz, Microsoft’s Managing Director of Federal Government Affairs, told Murdok that the company strongly supported telecommunications reform legislation aimed at facilitating competition of video and high-speed Internet service in the US.
Krumholtz echoed telecom arguments that regulatory barriers should be reduced so telephone companies can enter the video distribution business and promote investment in “the next generation pipes.” However, Krumholtz indicated that the current legislation did not go far enough to secure the tenets of Net Neutrality.
“While current legislation does a commendable job of ensuring that consumers will continue to enjoy Internet connections unimpeded, we believe more could be done to preserve fair access for those offering online content and services,” he said.
“We look forward to continuing to work with Congress to promote broadband deployment, to enact meaningful franchise reform, and to preserve the Internet as an engine for economic growth and innovation for all.”
Microsoft has a definite stake in the debate. The company’s MSN portal, among other Web services, could face much higher fees to operate outside the so-called “slow lane,” or even just to load faster than a competitor. Web companies, who already pay bandwidth fees, would have vast increases in cost for use of that bandwidth without protections for Net Neutrality.
Discuss this article with your fellow WebPros at WebProWorld.
Add to 
Bookmark Murdok: 
