[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 25, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S181-S185]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Ms. CANTWELL (for herself and Mr. Franken):
  S. 74. A bill to preserve the free and open nature of the Internet, 
expand the benefits of broadband, and promote

[[Page S182]]

universally available and affordable broadband service; to the 
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
that will preserve the free and open Internet that has led to the 
growth of broadband.
  The broadband Internet is integral to U.S. job creation, economic 
growth, education, civic engagement, and innovation.
  The network design principles fostering the development of the 
broadband Internet to date, an end-to-end design, layered architecture, 
and open standards, promotes innovation at the edge of the network and 
gives end users choice and control of their online activities.
  These network design principles have led to the network neutrality of 
the Internet, where there are no paid-for premium fast lanes and best-
effort slow lanes.
  Today, broadband providers have access to technology and an economic 
incentive to favor their own or affiliated services, content, and 
applications; and discriminate against other providers of services 
content, and applications.
  If our Nation is to achieve the ambitious broadband goals put forward 
in the National Broadband Plan, the U.S. needs a clear Federal policy 
that preserves the historically free and open nature of the Internet.
  The policy must apply to all broadband Internet access service 
providers regardless of the means by which they reach the end user.
  As you know, the FCC released its net neutrality rules last fall.
  I consider the Commission's actions to be completely within the 
bounds of its authority.
  The Chevron deference courts give agencies is rather broad.
  A quick read of the 2005 U.S. Supreme Court's Brand X decision tells 
you all you need to know.
  Former FCC Chairman Powell was very creative in his approach to 
deregulating broadband over cable modem in 2002.
  As you remember, one of the most conservative justices on the Supreme 
Court, Justice Scalia, voted against the FCC action saying more or less 
that what Chairman Powell did was an overreach.
  Even so, the final decision was six to three in favor of the FCC. 
That is how broad the Chevron deference is.
  And because of the meticulous way Chairman Genachowski conducted the 
Commission's process, in the end, I am confident the court system will 
uphold its actions.
  My issue with the Commission's net neutrality rules is that I do not 
think the Chairman was bold enough.
  The Commission should have issued one set of rules that covered 
broadband delivered over wireline, wireless, or some combination of the 
two. Everyone realizes that the future of broadband is wireless. And 
with the rollout of 4-G wireless services, that future is with us now.
  The Commission should not have kept open the door for any pay-for-
priority schemes. It will lead to a tiered Internet, where broadband 
Internet service providers have the incentive to create artificial 
bandwidth shortages to maximize profits, rather than invest in new 
capacity.
  The Commission also needed to get the definitions of broadband and 
reasonable network management right. One was too broad and one too 
narrow. The wording in definitions is negotiated over fiercely because, 
if not crafted properly, it can lead to loopholes that severely 
undercut the effectiveness of the rules.
  More fundamentally, the Commission should have reclassified broadband 
Internet access into Title II of the communications act and forebear 
from regulation all of the elements more appropriate to Title I. It 
would have taken the Commission a lot more time and resources, but 
getting net neutrality right is that important, because this is the 
foundation that all broadband rules and regulations will be built on 
going forward.
  It is surprising that as weak as these rules are they have stirred up 
so much vitriol.
  I know this body will be taking up this matter another day.
  My legislation puts in statute strong net neutrality protections, 
takes steps to promote broadband adoption, and provides consumer 
protection for broadband end users.
  First I want to acknowledge the leadership of our former colleague 
Senator Dorgan on this issue.
  The bill builds on what we started working together on last fall.
  It also borrows some of the good ideas of Mr. Markey and Ms. Eshoo in 
the House.
  At a high level my legislation creates a new section in Title II of 
the Communications Act that codifies the six new neutrality principles 
in the FCC's November 2009 notice of proposed rulemaking for preserving 
the open Internet.
  My legislation adds a few things to the FCC's list. For example, my 
legislation also prohibits broadband operators from requiring content, 
service, or application providers from paying for prioritized delivery 
of their IP packets; more commonly referred to as pay-for priority. It 
also requires broadband providers to interconnect with middle-mile 
broadband providers on just and reasonable terms and conditions.
  All of this is subject to reasonable network management as defined. 
And it applies to all broadband Internet platforms--wireline and 
wireless.
  My legislation takes several steps to promote the adoption of 
broadband, steps such as requiring broadband providers to provide 
service upon reasonable request by an end user; and requiring broadband 
providers to offer standalone broadband at reasonable rates, terms and 
conditions.
  My legislation increases consumer protections because all charges, 
practices, classifications, regulations, for and in connection with the 
broadband Internet access service must be just and reasonable.
  My legislation directs the FCC to come up with enforcement 
mechanisms. End users, who include individuals, businesses of all 
sizes, non-for-profit organization, and others, can file a complaint 
either at the FCC or at a U.S. District Court, but not both. 
Additionally, State Attorneys General can file on behalf of their 
residents and seek either to enforce the act or to seek civil 
penalties.
  My legislation supports continued broadband investment, innovation, 
and jobs.
  Let me explain.
  First innovation. With the Internet's end-to-end design, innovation 
is at the edge of the network in the hands of the end users. New ideas 
for online content, application, and services do not need the 
permission of the centralized network operator to become successful. 
Without net neutrality protections, I foresee situations arising that 
will chill innovation.
  For example, if a broadband provider has a partnership with company A 
to provide end users a certain on-line service, and new company B comes 
up with a better value proposition for providing that same on-line 
service, how many believe that the broadband provider will allow 
company B get access to its end users with the same bandwidth or 
quality-of-service assurances, particularly if Company A gives a 
portion of its revenues from that on-line service to the broadband 
provider.
  Experience has taught me that the most promising path to developing 
an innovation into a new on-line product or service is hard to predict, 
if one can do it at all. If broadband Internet access service provider 
end up on the critical path for successful commercialization of on-line 
innovations, the path to success will be all the much harder. The 
language in my bill tries to prevent these types of situations from 
happening.
  This leads to my second point, the chilling of investment without 
effective net neutrality rules.
  Take the situation where an early stage online company is seeking 
venture capital investments. The first question any responsible VC will 
ask is whether the following list of large broadband providers are on-
board with the online product or service. Because if there is a 
situation, as in my example on innovation, where the large broadband 
provider has a partnership with the early stage companies' entrenched 
competitor, it is going to be difficult, if not impossible to raise 
funds. Basically, the blessing of broadband providers will become 
essential to obtaining VC investment of any magnitude. How to get large 
broadband

[[Page S183]]

providers on board will become a key part of every business plan. 
Broadband providers would then become gatekeepers to online innovation 
and investment.
  Broadband investment can also be chilled a second way. The logical 
extension of pay-for-priority is a tiered Internet with premium fast 
lanes and best effort slow lanes. With a tiered Internet, it becomes 
more profitable to create an artificial bandwidth shortage rather than 
in investing to increase broadband capacity of the local network.
  The reason is that it is easier to adjust pricing policies than 
forecast the optimum level of investment and be able to finance it at 
favorable rates. Recall the Internet bubble about a decade ago. That is 
why I believe that if pay-for-priority exists, it will ultimately lead 
to a lower level of broadband investment that would occur otherwise.
  I agree with the need for broadband providers to upgrade the quality 
of their network and increase the available bandwidth to meet the 
anticipated market demand. If end users want more bandwidth or quality-
of-service assurances they should be willing to pay for it. It is that 
simple. I have no issue with allowing broadband providers explore 
different pricing options for consumers. My bill doesn't prevent that.
  Third jobs. Since the advent of the broadband age, there have been 
more high-value-added, high-paying jobs created by companies operating 
at the edge of the network than companies at the center of the network. 
And because of chilled investment and other restrictions, without net 
neutrality rules, I believe we will experience a lower rate of growth 
of broadband-enabled jobs.
  Let me close by saying that I bring a unique perspective to the 
policy discussion over net neutrality by virtue of working in the tech 
industry during the dial-up age and early years of broadband.
  To put things in perspective, the ideas and language that became the 
Telecommunications Act of 1996 was coming together around the time 
Netscape 1.0 was being introduced commercially.
  Whether intentionally or unintentionally, that 1996 Telecom Act 
accelerated the roll out of broadband, even though the word Internet 
appeared less then one dozen times. It set the wheels in motion by 
allowing local competition to the offspring of Ma Bell, allowing 
telecom companies to offer video programming, and allowing cable 
companies to offer telecom service.
  Cable companies responded to this competitive threat, and that from 
the satellite TV companies due to the Satellite Home Viewing Act, by 
making infrastructure investments that allowed them to offer new 
broadband service over cable modem.
  Competitive Local Exchange Carriers, taking advantage of their new 
ability to line share and access unbundled network elements, also saw 
the competitive benefits of offering broadband service.
  The traditional telecom companies, well, at the time they seemed 
focused on trying to reassemble Ma Bell and having us all buy an extra, 
dedicated landline or two for dial up service.
  Eventually, the competitive pressure did drive them to make the 
necessary investment to offer broadband.
  The business models for delivering broadband Internet access differed 
than that of dial-up. In their heyday, ISPs such as AOL, CompuServe, 
and Prodigy did not own their own infrastructure; they leased telecom 
transmission capacity from third parties telecom companies. With 
broadband, for a number of reasons, there came the much greater 
vertical integration of the ISP and transmission capacity.
  Looking back, broadband over cable modem flourished under Title II 
through 2002, until the FCC deregulated it. Similarly, broadband over 
landlines flourished under Title II through 2005, until Chairman 
Martin's deregulated it in the wake of the Brand X decision.
  As Senator Dorgan used to say, having broadband under Title II 
ensured that there was a broadband cop on the beat.
  If there were functioning local markets for broadband services, 
consumers would have true choices, and I might think differently about 
the need for legislation. Unfortunately end users in most communities 
have a limited number of choices at best when it comes to broadband 
Internet access services.
  At its most basic, that is why we need to return that broadband cop 
to the beat. My bill will do that, and do that without regulating the 
Internet.
  It will achieve the regulatory certainty industry seems to clamoring 
for by having the net neutrality protection in statute rather than left 
to agency rule and the politics of each succeeding administration.
  I don't claim that this bill is a perfect bill. It lays down a marker 
for where we should start the discussion.
  Given the complexity of the Internet ecosystem, any legislation will 
have to be worked through by the Commerce Committee. There are always 
details, details, and more details with respect to business models and 
usage cases that need to be considered. For these reasons I recognize 
that the Commission will need some flexibility in implementing the 
statute and I believe my language will provide them with just enough.
  My bill will preserve an open and free Internet, allow for 
broadband's continued growth, and the economic growth and jobs that it 
will create.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 74

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Internet Freedom, Broadband 
     Promotion, and Consumer Protection Act of 2011''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds the following:
       (1) Two-way communications networks constitute basic 
     infrastructure that is as essential to our national economy 
     as roads and electricity.
       (2) The broadband Internet constitutes the most important 
     two-way communications infrastructure of our time.
       (3) Access to the broadband Internet is critical for job 
     creation, economic growth, and technological innovation.
       (4) Access to the broadband Internet creates opportunity 
     for more direct civic engagement, increased educational 
     attainment, and enables free speech.
       (5) The network design principles fostering the development 
     of the broadband Internet to date, an end-to-end design, 
     layered architecture, and open standards, promotes innovation 
     at the edge of the network and gives end users choice and 
     control of their online activities.
       (6) These network design principles have led to the network 
     neutrality of the Internet, where there are no paid for 
     premium fast lanes and best effort slow lanes.
       (7) According to the Federal Communications Commission in 
     2009, technologies now allow network operators to distinguish 
     different classes of Internet traffic, to offer different 
     qualities-of-service, and to charge different prices to each 
     class of Internet traffic.
       (8) Broadband Internet access service providers have an 
     economic interest to discriminate in favor of their own or 
     affiliated services, content, and applications and against 
     other providers of such services, content, and applications.
       (9) Broadband Internet access service providers have an 
     economic interest in, and the ability to adopt, pay-for-
     priority schemes to the detriment of job creation, economic 
     growth, innovation, and consumer protections.
       (10) The market for broadband today demonstrates 
     substantial obstacles to effective competition, to the 
     protection of users, and to the continued viability of a free 
     and open Internet.
       (11) These obstacles impede the universal deployment and 
     adoption of broadband, impede meeting the goals set forth in 
     the National Broadband Plan, and perpetuate a digital divide.
       (12) The United States needs clear Federal policy that 
     preserves the historically free and open nature of the 
     Internet, expands the benefits of broadband, and promotes 
     universally available and affordable broadband service that 
     does not chill innovation or speech within the content, 
     applications, and services available online.
       (13) The Federal policy to ensure that the Internet remains 
     free and open must apply equally to all broadband Internet 
     access services, regardless of whether those services use 
     wire, radio, or some combination of those means to reach the 
     end user.

     SEC. 3. INTERNET FREEDOM.

       Title II of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 201 
     et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 280. INTERNET FREEDOM AND BROADBAND PROMOTION.

       ``(a) Purposes.--The purposes of this section are--
       ``(1) to promote increased availability and adoption of 
     broadband for all Americans;

[[Page S184]]

       ``(2) to promote consumer choice and competition among 
     broadband Internet access service providers and among 
     providers of lawful content, applications, and services; and
       ``(3) to protect consumers, innovators and entrepreneurs 
     from harmful, discriminatory, or anti-competitive behavior by 
     providers of broadband Internet access service.
       ``(b) Broadband Internet Access Service and Charges.--
       ``(1) It shall be the duty of every broadband Internet 
     access service provider to furnish such broadband Internet 
     access service to end users upon reasonable request.
       ``(2) Broadband Internet access service providers shall not 
     require end users to purchase voice grade telephone service, 
     commercial mobile radio voice services, or multichannel-video 
     programming distribution services or other specialized 
     services as a condition on the purchase of any broadband 
     Internet access service.
       ``(3) All charges, practices, classifications, and 
     regulations for and in connection with broadband Internet 
     access service shall be just and reasonable.
       ``(4) If a broadband Internet access service provider 
     allows its end users to request quality-of-service assurances 
     for the transmission of Internet protocol packets associated 
     with its own applications, services, or content or that of 
     its affiliates, then--
       ``(A) the broadband Internet access service provider shall 
     permit such assurances for all Internet Protocol packets 
     chosen by the end user, without regard to the content, 
     applications, or services involved; and
       ``(B) any quality-of-service assurance shall not block, 
     interfere with, or degrade, any other end user's access to 
     the content, applications, and services of their choice.
       ``(c) Ensuring Open Access to the Broadband Internet.--A 
     broadband Internet access service provider may not unjustly 
     or unreasonably--
       ``(1) block, interfere with, or degrade an end user's 
     ability to access, use, send, post, receive, or offer lawful 
     content (including fair use), applications, or services of 
     the user's choice;
       ``(2) block, interfere with, or degrade an end user's 
     ability to connect and use the end user's choice of legal 
     devices that do not harm the network;
       ``(3) prevent or interfere with competition among network, 
     applications, service or content providers;
       ``(4) engage in discrimination against any lawful Internet 
     content, application, service, or service provider with 
     respect to network management practices, network performance 
     characteristics, or commercial terms and conditions;
       ``(5) give preference to affiliated content, applications, 
     or services with respect to network management practices, 
     network performance characteristics, or commercial terms and 
     conditions;
       ``(6) charge a content, application, or service provider 
     for access to the broadband Internet access service 
     providers' end users based on differing levels of quality of 
     service or prioritized delivery of Internet protocol packets;
       ``(7) prioritize among or between content, applications, 
     and services, or among or between different types of content, 
     applications, and services unless the end user requests to 
     have such prioritization;
       ``(8) install or utilize network features, functions, or 
     capabilities that prevent or interfere with compliance with 
     the requirements of this section; or
       ``(9) refuse to interconnect on just and reasonable terms 
     and conditions.
       ``(d) Reasonable Network Management.--
       ``(1) In general.--Nothing in this section shall prohibit a 
     broadband Internet access service provider from engaging in 
     reasonable network management.
       ``(2) Reasonableness presumption.--For purposes of this 
     section, a network management practice is presumed to be 
     reasonable for a broadband Internet access service provider 
     only if it is--
       ``(A) essential for a legitimate network management purpose 
     assuring the operation of the network;
       ``(B) appropriate for achieving the stated purpose;
       ``(C) narrowly tailored; and
       ``(D) among the least restrictive, least discriminatory, 
     and least constricting of consumer choice available.
       ``(3) Factors to be considered.--In determining whether a 
     network management practice is reasonable, the Commission 
     shall take into account the particular network architecture 
     and any technology and operational limitations of the 
     broadband Internet access service provider.
       ``(4) Limitation.--A network management practice may not be 
     considered to be a reasonable network management if the 
     broadband Internet access service provider charges content, 
     applications, or other online service providers for differing 
     levels of quality of service or prioritized delivery of 
     Internet Protocol packets.
       ``(e) Other Regulated Services.--This section shall not be 
     construed to prevent broadband Internet access service 
     providers from offering interconnected Voice over Internet 
     Protocol (VoIP) services or multichannel-video programming 
     distribution services regulated under title VI of this Act on 
     transmission capacity also used by broadband Internet access 
     services.
       ``(f) Transparency.--
       ``(1) In general.--A provider of broadband Internet access 
     service--
       ``(A) shall disclose publicly on its external website and 
     at the point of sale accurate information regarding the 
     network management practices, network performance, and 
     commercial terms of its broadband Internet access service in 
     plain language sufficient for end users to make informed 
     choices regarding use of such services, and for content, 
     application, service, and device providers to develop, 
     market, and maintain Internet offerings; and
       ``(B) shall disclose publicly on its external website and 
     at the point of sale any other practices that affect 
     communications between a user and a content, application, or 
     service provider in the ordinary, routine use of such 
     broadband service.
       ``(2) Exemptions.--The Commission may exempt certain kinds 
     of information from disclosure on the grounds that it is 
     competitively sensitive or could compromise network 
     security.Within 90 days after the date of enactment of the 
     Internet Freedom, Broadband Promotion, and Consumer 
     Protection Act of 2011, the Commission shall conclude a 
     rulemaking proceeding to implement this subsection.
       ``(g) Stand-Alone Internet Access Service.--
       ``(1) In general.--Within 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of the Internet Freedom, Broadband Promotion, and 
     Consumer Protection Act of 2011, the Commission shall 
     promulgate rules to ensure that broadband Internet access 
     providers do not require the purchase of voice grade 
     telephone service, commercial mobile radio voice services, or 
     multichannel-video programming distribution services as a 
     condition of purchasing any broadband Internet access 
     service, and that the rates, terms, and conditions for 
     providing such service are just and reasonable.
       ``(2) Report.--In the report required by section 706 of the 
     Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. 1302), the 
     Commission shall collect information on the availability, 
     promotion, average speed, and average pricing of stand-alone 
     broadband Internet access service offered by broadband 
     Internet access providers.
       ``(3) Eligibility to access any universal service fund for 
     broadband.--If the Commission establishes a universal service 
     fund for broadband Internet services, only broadband Internet 
     access service providers that offer stand-alone broadband 
     service shall be eligible to participate in the fund.
       ``(h) Enforcement, Liability, and Recovery of Damages.--
       ``(1) Expedited complaint process.--Within 180 days after 
     the date of enactment of the Internet Freedom, Broadband 
     Promotion, and Consumer Protection Act of 2011, the 
     Commission shall prescribe rules to permit any aggrieved 
     person to file a complaint with the Commission concerning a 
     violation of subsections (b), (c), or (g) of this section, 
     and establish enforcement and expedited adjudicatory review 
     procedures including the resolution of complaints not later 
     than 90 days after such complaint was filed, except for good 
     cause shown.
       ``(2) Libility of broadband Internet access service 
     providers for damages.--If a broadband Internet access 
     service provider does, or causes or permits to be done, any 
     act, matter, or thing that is prohibited under this section, 
     or fails to do any act, matter, or thing required by this 
     section to be done, the provider shall be liable to the 
     person or persons injured thereby for the full amount of 
     damages sustained in consequence of any such violation of the 
     provisions of this section, together with a reasonable 
     counsel or attorney's fee, as determined by the Commission.
       ``(3) Venue.--Any person claiming to be damaged by any 
     broadband Internet access provider subject to the provisions 
     of this section may either make a complaint to the Commission 
     as provided for in paragraph (1), or may bring suit for the 
     recovery of the damages in a district court of the United 
     States that meets applicable requirements relating to venue 
     under section 1391 of title 28, United States Code. A 
     claimant may not bring an action in a Federal district court 
     if the claimant has filed a complaint with the Commission 
     under paragraph (1) with respect to the same violation.
       ``(i) Enforcement by States.--
       ``(1) In general.--The chief legal officer of a State, or 
     any other State officer authorized by law to bring actions on 
     behalf of the residents of a State, may bring a civil action, 
     as parens patriae, on behalf of the residents of that State 
     in an appropriate district court of the United States to 
     enforce this section or to impose civil penalties for 
     violation of this section, whenever the chief legal officer 
     or other State officer has reason to believe that the 
     interests of the residents of the State have been or are 
     being threatened or adversely affected by a violation of this 
     section.
       ``(2) Notice.--The chief legal officer or other State 
     officer shall serve written notice on the Commission of any 
     civil action under paragraph (1) prior to initiating such 
     civil action. The notice shall include a copy of the 
     complaint to be filed to initiate such civil action, except 
     that if it is not feasible for the State to provide such 
     prior notice, the State shall provide such notice immediately 
     upon instituting such civil action.
       ``(3) Authority to intervene.--Upon receiving the notice 
     required by paragraph (2), the Commission shall have the 
     right--
       ``(A) to intervene in the action;

[[Page S185]]

       ``(B) upon so intervening, to be heard on all matters 
     arising therein; and
       ``(C) to file petitions for appeal.
       ``(4) Rule of construction.--For purposes of bringing any 
     civil action under paragraph (1), nothing in this subsection 
     shall prevent the chief legal officer or other State officer 
     from exercising the powers conferred on that officer by the 
     laws of such State to conduct investigations or to administer 
     oaths or affirmations or to compel the attendance of 
     witnesses or the production of documentary and other evidence
       ``(5) Venue; service of process.--
       ``(A) Venue.--An action brought under paragraph (1) shall 
     be brought in a district court of the United States that 
     meets applicable requirements relating to venue under section 
     1391 of title 28, United States Code.
       ``(B) Service of process.--In an action brought under 
     paragraph (1)--
       ``(i) process may be served without regard to the 
     territorial limits of the district or of the State in which 
     the action is instituted; and
       ``(ii) a person who participated in an alleged violation 
     that is being litigated in the civil action may be joined in 
     the civil action without regard to the residence of the 
     person.
       ``(j) Commission Authority.--The Commission may perform any 
     and all acts, make such rules and regulations and issue such 
     orders, not inconsistent with this section, as may be 
     necessary to implement the purposes of this section.
       ``(k) Other Laws and Considerations.--
       ``(1) Nothing in this section supersedes any obligation or 
     authorization a provider or broadband Internet access service 
     may have to address the needs of emergency communications or 
     law enforcement, public safety, or national security 
     authorities, consistent with or as permitted by applicable 
     law, or limits the provider's ability to do so.
       ``(2) Nothing in this section authorizes a provider of 
     broadband Internet access service to address copyright 
     infringement or other unlawful activity of providers, 
     subscribers, or users, beyond its obligations under the 
     Digital Millennium Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. 101 note), the 
     amendments made by that Act, and consistent other applicable 
     laws.
       ``(l) Studies.--Within one-year after the date of enactment 
     of this Act the Government Accountability Office shall 
     complete and submit reports to the Senate Committee on 
     Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and the House 
     Committee on Energy and Commerce, on the evolution of 
     commercial and other arrangements by which broadband Internet 
     access service providers interconnect to Internet backbone 
     providers and intermediary networks, and assess whether, as 
     the volume and mix of Internet Protocol traffic requested by 
     and transported to and from the customers of broadband 
     Internet access service providers has changed over time, 
     there is a market failure with respect to the existing market 
     mechanisms of transit contracts and non-settlement peering 
     agreements.
       ``(m) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Affiliated.--The term `affiliated' includes--
       ``(A) a person that (directly or indirectly) owns or 
     controls, is owned or controlled by, or is under common 
     ownership or control with another person; and
       ``(B) a person that has a contract or other arrangement 
     with a content, application, or service provider relating to 
     access to or distribution of such content, application or 
     services over the Internet.
       ``(2) Broadband internet access.--The term `broadband 
     Internet access'--
       ``(A) means the ability for an end user to transmit and 
     receive data to the Internet using Internet Protocol at peak 
     download data transfer rates in excess of 200 kilobits per 
     second, through an always-on connection; but
       ``(B) does not include dial-up access requiring an end user 
     to initiate a call across the public switched telephone 
     network to establish a connection.
       ``(3) Broadband internet access service.--The term 
     `broadband Internet access service' means any communications 
     service by wire or radio that provides broadband Internet 
     access directly to the public, or to such classes of users as 
     to be effectively available directly to the public.
       ``(4) Broadband internet access service provider.--The term 
     `broadband Internet access service provider' means a person 
     or entity that operates or resells and controls any facility 
     used to provide an Internet access service directly to the 
     public, whether provided for a fee or for free, and whether 
     provided via wire or radio, except when such service is 
     offered as an incidendal component of a noncommunications 
     contractual relationship.
       ``(5) End user.--The term `end user' means any person who, 
     by way of a broadband service, takes and utilizes Internet 
     services, whether provided for a fee, in exchange for an 
     explicit benefit, or for free.''.
       ``(6) Internet.--The term `Internet' means a system of 
     interconnected networks that use the Internet Protocol for 
     communications with resources or endpoints reachable, 
     directly or through a proxy, via a globally unique Internet 
     address assigned by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority 
     or any successor or designee; or any technology the 
     Commission shall find to be functionally equivalent.
       ``(7) Interconnected voice over internet protocol (voip) 
     service.--The term `Interconnected VoIP service' means a 
     service that enables real-time, two-way voice communications; 
     requires a broadband connection from the user's location; 
     requires Internet protocol compatible customer premises 
     equipment; and permits users generally to receive calls that 
     originate on the public switched telephone network and to 
     terminate calls to the public switched telephone network 
     subject to section 9.3 of the Commission's regulations (47 
     C.F.R. 9.3).
                                 ______