BT Content Service Breaks Net Neutrality, Say Critics

BT’s wholesale unit has launched  a two-tier service that allows content providers to pay for “first class” content delivery – drawing criticism from campaigners for a neutral Internet.

The BT service – known as Content Connect – uses Cisco’s Content Delivery System to let content owners deliver higher quality video to their customers regardless of congestion caused by other traffic outside the Content Connect service.

Unlike current content delivery networks, which hold content at the edge of the broadband network, Content Connect allows Internet service providers to cache content deep within the network. This enables broadcasters to avoid congested areas of the network and provide a guaranteed level of service, even at peak times.

Under the terms of the new service, content providers will be able to pay ISPs to have their content delivered at a higher quality of service. This service will be good enough to let broadband become a live TV platform, and could give a significant advantage to services such as YouTube and BBC iPlayer if their owners, Google and the BBC, decide to pay for the performance boost.

Net neutrality clash

“Our industry is witnessing a significant growth in content delivery over broadband – driven by the consumption of video services at home, at work and on the move,” said Simon Orme, BT Wholesale’s strategy director of content services, when the plans were first announced in September 2010. “[Content Connect] will allow all players – including content service providers – to extract more value from content services in the future while pleasing end users.”

However, the Open Rights Group has slammed BT’s plans, claiming that the new service could oppose net neutrality – the principle that all web traffic should be treated equally.

“We are talking about ISPs competing with the Internet for content delivery. Whether films, music or gaming services, the idea is that ISPs will deliver this stuff better and more reliably than the Internet,” Jim Killock (left), executive director of the Open Rights Group said to eWEEK Europe.

“The result could be a fundamental shift away from buying services from the Internet to bundled services from ISPs: which would reduce competition and take investment away from Internet companies. That would be bad for everyone,” he added.

Offering ‘fast lane’ access

The issue of net neutrality has been gaining prominence in Britain, after the UK’s culture minister Ed Vaizey suggested in November 2010 that Internet service providers could charge heavy bandwidth users such as Google and Skype for “fast lane” access to their content. This “light regulation”, he said, would bring in additional revenue streams for ISPs and help pay for the expansion of online services.

Following an outraged response from advocates of net neutrality, Vaizey soon backtracked on his comments, claiming that his “first and overriding priority” was an open Internet where consumers have access to all legal content. “Should the Internet develop in a way that was detrimental to consumer interests we would seek to intervene,” he said.

Meanwhile, the issue continues to heat up in the United States, after the federal government was given formal authority, through the FCC, to regulate Internet traffic in December. However, there is substantial opposition to the decision, and either Congress or the courts may overrule the regulations.