Telecoms vs. Everyone: The EU Cost-Sharing Debate – Internet Society

The cost-sharing debate is heating up, especially now that the European Commission has launched a public consultation. What’s at stake—and which stakeholders are supporting these proposals?
Let’s start with how we got here. The three European institutions (Commission, Parliament, and Council) have taken the political decision—as formally agreed on the European Declaration of Digital Rights and Principles for the Digital Decade—to develop “adequate frameworks so that all market actors benefiting from the digital transformation assume their social responsibilities and make a fair and proportionate contribution to the costs of public goods, services and infrastructures, for the benefit of all people living in the EU.”
This paragraph has been exploited by the largest European telecom operators. They’re reviving an old debate and requesting new regulations that would require the largest non-European content and application providers (CAPs) to make monetary contributions in exchange for traffic flows. These new regulations would be in direct conflict with the open, globally connected, secure, and trustworthy Internet. They would also violate net neutrality provisions and fragment the Internet, hurting European consumers and economies.
European telecom operators are trying to present this issue as a balanced and productive debate. The reality is that these telecom operators are alone in their support of traffic flow-based monetary contributions.
Where does this leave everybody else? The other stakeholder positions show just how lopsided the debate is.
In one corner are the telecom operators.
The European Telecommunications Network Operator’s Association (ETNO) commissioned a report with the consulting group Axon Partners in support of traffic-flow based contributions. The Global System for Mobile Communications (GSMA), whose membership is largely composed of the same players, has expressed a similar opinion, in a joint release together with other large telecoms’ associations.
In the other corner are a broad list of stakeholders raising the alarm about traffic flow-based contributions.
These include consumer advocates, civil society organizations, academics, regulators, small and medium enterprise sized Internet service providers, CAPs, and European Internet users. CAPs understandably oppose the proposal, and their industry association, the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA), has responded to the proposal. They’ve also fostered a study, published by Analysys Mason, dismantling the telecoms’ arguments.
Why this critical mass? This isn’t a telecom operator vs. CAPs debate, but a direct threat to the Internet. Each stakeholder approaches the proposal from different angles, but their arguments share this common thread:
The proposal from telecom operators will harm the Internet and its users. It must be stopped immediately.
The large telecom operators are alone in this fight. The challenge is that the European Commission seems to be treating the issue as a balanced debate. They’re backing large telecom operators’ requests for new regulations—despite the overwhelming opposing voices and the risks to the Internet.
Every voice must be heard. We encourage our community and everyone else interested in defending an open Internet to contribute to the public consultation, which is open until 19 May 2023. By speaking up, you can protect the Internet—and make sure it continues to offer opportunities for future generations.
Disclaimer: Viewpoints expressed in this post are those of the author and may or may not reflect official Internet Society positions.
To some, encryption might seem like the stuff of spy movies, but we all rely on it to keep…
The NDSS Symposium returns to San Diego, USA, from 26 February to 1 March 2024. Discover the topics and sessions…
If any two people across the world from each other access the Internet at the same time, will they…

source

About The Author

admin

See author's posts