The Push for Net Neutrality Arose From Lack of Choice

The case for strong government rules to protect an open Internet rests in large part on a perceived market failure — the lack of competition for high-speed Internet service into American homes.

The Federal Communications Commission is expected to adopt on Thursday utility-style rules to ensure so-called net neutrality, prohibiting practices like offering pay-to-play fast lanes on the Internet. A legislative response by Republicans on Capitol Hill has stalled out.

The F.C.C.’s approach makes sense, proponents say, because for genuine high-speed Internet service most American households now have only one choice, and most often it is a cable company.

“For the moment, cable has won the high-speed Internet market,” said Susan Crawford, co-director of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School, and a former adviser to the Obama administration.

The new rules will not ensure competition from new entrants, ranging from next-generation wireless technology to ultrahigh-speed networks built by municipalities. Instead, strong regulation is intended to prevent the dominant broadband suppliers from abusing their market power.

Technology, of course, can change quickly and unpredictably. So, analysts say, it is impossible to predict what the competitive landscape might look like in several years, or a decade from now.