Thats what ties all our members together. Everything from Net Neutrality which we will talk about to trade policy to so many other issues, thats what we work on. Host how did you get active in this area . Guest i worked on the hill for 12 years and did a lot of work on telecommunications, internet tech policy and was fortunate when the companies can together want to start this association. Theres a lot of tech associations out there, tech group and tech is very broad, includes hardware, software and other technology. We are just Internet Companies and so i was brought in 201 201d we started the association with ten of 14 members and today we represent 40 companies. Host used to work for fred upton, republican. Does he agree with you and Internet Association on the future of Net Neutrality . Guest i dont work for the children anymore. I cannot speak for him. This is an issue where do you think of bipartisan agreement from republicans on energy and commerce and from senators, Senate Commerce on both side sif the other they agree on the end result. There is disagreement on how you get there. Im happy everybody agrees there should be a free and open internet and we can debate the pathway. Thats fine. But there is bipartisan agreement applet on the end result. Host how would fcc chairman ajit pai proposal to change that Neutrality Principles or rules affect a facebook, dropbox, and amazon . Guest we will have to see what he does. He only put it out. Where strong supporters of the existing rules on the book. We think theyre working for consumers which is the most important thing. It does matter for startups and Internet Companies but the reason the rules are there its for consumers but with what the existing rules. We concern if they change them it will weaken those protections and allow the Service Providers to be gatekeepers, and thats really what the problem would be. Host so title ii is the path that you support . Guest so title ii was really just a jurisdiction. Our support is based on the rules that fall under title ii and in result that create. Host joining our conversation this week is Margaret Harding mcgill out politico. Thanks for having me. I want to focus on discussion about Net Neutrality. I know you talked about defending the rules at the fcc but this is been a fight thats been going on for a while. What you think appetite is like a monkey or members for yet another Net Neutrality fight . Guest when you say about it really has been a while, since 2005 really. You think in terms of i think thats a long time. In washington youre such a long but in internet years its an eternity. Think about how much internet has changed over the last four years and when youre talking about over ten years, its changed a lot. Its important think we get this right and we do in a way that will be legally sustainable and not have tickets going back into with this issue every two years. You think your members are prepared to step up and say these are the rules would want, we are willing to fight to keep them . Guest we are in it to win. Where consensusbased organization, members drive our agenda and this is a really high priority for us and we are putting a lot of time into this. Its because it matters to our members and to our customers. United meeting with chairman pai about the topic short before he unveiled his proposal. Was he receptive to your concerns or do you think you may progress in that meeting . Guest i hope we may progress. We will have to see how this turns out. Based on the conversation and things he said public agrees generally there should be protections, and we should have an open internet. What we disagree on it how do you get there. I think that will be a lot of what the debate is in the next two months. Host were their problems prior to the wheeler svc putting title ii into this equation . Guest yesterday nursing thing when you look back at the history of Net Neutrality, we started out in 2005 i believe with principles that were not enforceable. In 2007, again lets try to remember what internet was, facebook was in its infancy. There was no uber, no airbnb, a lot of things we have today didnt exist. Host the iphone was just coming out and to the idea of watching video on your mobile device you are not think about that in 2005. 2007 there was a complaint against comcast and, from the fcc, that went to court. The Court Reversed to construct and because they said the fcc rules were principles and not enforceable which led us to 2010 which the first real Net Neutrality rules. Those were under title i. They didnt include mobile. Those rules i think are good at the time. Verizon could test it in corporate verizon was successful in court for those rules were struck down not because the fcc, the court didnt say you cant do that. They gave a roadmap on how to go for it which led to the 2015th rolls under title ii and include mobile because a lot of change internet from 2010 when you would not think to include mobile as part of the rules 2015. They did want to include mobile in the rules. Thats where we are today. The title ii piece really is just a jurisdiction that you based on the courts but again the kinds of rules under that is really what were fighting for and we need to make sure we maintain. Host does is put the onus on congress to come up with a clear set of rules, new role . Guest congress wrote the loss in first place. When you talk about title i, title ii or sometime in the future, thats a jurisdiction that Congress Take to the fcc. Ultimately congress can write the laws and a number of things that would be sustainable. Our thought is the fcc got it right. Nothing is a guarantee in congress because a long process going through two chambers and get to the president s desk. The rules are fine. Its not broke. Dont try to fix it and will try to maintain those rules. One of the things youre focused on in your meeting with the chairman of Net Neutrality was interconnections. This concerned about and a connection being used as a chokepoint to flow traffic or maybe extract coal from companies. If i understand and looks like the fcc is proposing to remove the Agencies Authority over internet traffic exchange. Can you explain why you think that might be a problem for your members . Guest now come at the end of the day again its about consumers. You are looking to access the internet, you pay your Internet Service provider via comcast or att or whoever it is. You pay a lot of money and access to the internet. If your experience is altered in some way, if the site is blocked or slow down or do some other things going on, as a consumer you dont know what that is happening in the process. Its happening at the point of interconnection to you as your accessing internet computer look at all that should be included to protect the consumer and their ability to access the entire internet, and thats why we grace that. Gating into the weeds on the policy a bit, theres discussion about doing need this band unpaid internet privatization but one of the questions the proposal asked is if we allow paid prioritization, good internet Service Providers use that extra money to then offer cheaper broadband to endusers. Why might you disagree with that . Guest if you are allowing for fast lanes, you have slow lens, the reason the internet has worked so well is because theres been this pure competition where the entry for website or new app is very low. You he destroys all the time of facebook being started in a dorm room or a company like amazon being star in a garage. That is still happening today. The reason it happens today is because the barrier to entry is low, you cannot pick winners and losers and the consumer gets to pick whats best and not the company or isps that are deciding whats going to be fast or slow, deciding that. Some of the companies you mention are now pretty wellestablished entering the last debate netflix was like the poster child for Net Neutrality. I believe netflix has recently said hey, if they weaken the rules we think will be okay because we are so popular. Who among the Ten Companies d might think be the next phase of the debate . Guest i think thats the wrong way to look at it. I give our companies a lot of the credit for caring about this issue because its about what makes the internet ecosystem great and its about the customer. Our Companies Caremore about their customers and the Internet Users i think that almost any other industry. The reason is because competition is a click away. Use netflix as an example. Love the show but if i want to watch some terrific program on amazon prime video, you can do that if theres nothing stopping you from switching back and forth show to show. Or if the two of us, the three of us want to start our own video programming online tomorrow, like we can do that if we can create a show and if its good we can compete with netflix. I think thats what it is really about and having the Customer Experience be great online is why Companies Care about and why were still fighting for the. Host is it in a perverse way kind of an incumbent Protection System though when you put things under title ii . Guest again, i dont think its based on title i or title ii service. Its more about what the rules are. So for example, you mention one of the earlier proposal and what chairman pai could decide to do is keep it under title ii that allow for paid prioritization. That could happen. That couldve been the rules under wheeler and i can be what ajit pai does. You have title ii rules but the title ii rules allow for paid prioritization interview thats not to Net Neutrality detections that people want and we would support that it even though we start title ii but if we are allowed for paid prioritization we would oppose that. Host do you think at t should be allowed to not charge its customers data caps, or give a discount on directv . Guest so on the data cap question, its very comforted in the sense that we dont think it should be set artificially low or set in a way that is trying to create a price that is not active in the market or to create artificial scarcity, to sometimes happening. As it relates to prioritizing their own content, thats a problem and that something were concerned about as we see where youre giving priority to the content over others in some lease programs to get scarcity in the amount of data that consumers can have. I think the runs into real problem an people say hey, im getting free data. How is it . It seems like its difficult to say guest you are paying for. Nothing really is free. I think that needs to be transparency on what that is, and i think this does come back around to when you look at the zero raid program. In our view zero rating is not better whichever best for the consumer is great, and careful like its not necessarily free pic you are paying for your at t, you are paying for your isp connection and so its like were giving this back to you for free. You are paying for it. Theres convergent and bad versions of that. A good version might be something that tmobile had done where all of the same class of content doesnt count against the cap. Music, for example, meaning spotify, pandora, amazon music or any music service, youre automatically can be in that program. Or again like if the three of us today decide we dont like our day jobs, lets create a music streaming is is, the next day we can be on there. No barrier to entry. Everybody is free to access in equal weight. That version would be if theres a paid prioritization where theyre giving one prize to the dreck tv content and then having something separate from netflix and that chris a problem because new entrant cannot compete and integrates the expense of the user of being able to have free choice. It sounds like the way you view the rules now is they create a level Playing Field for everybody and changes to them might favor some companies over others. Chairman pai has talked about if you change the jurisdiction here, get rid of title ii, go back to title i, then the federal trade commission would have authority over broadband providers again and that could be good for policing their privacy practices. What do you think about the ftc becoming the Net Neutrality enforcer . Guest the ftc is a Great Organization i have a lot of respect for but in this area they are not subject matter experts. The engineers and expertise as all at the fcc. The ftc if the zero engineers work there. You wouldnt move drug approval from the fda to the ftc or the fcc. Why . Because of the scientists and doctors are at the fda. Same thing here. Host weve talked a bit about how our world has changed in the last ten, 15, 20 years because of the internet. Is it time for a new telecom bill, a comprehensive telecom bill . Guest perhaps. I always see the challenge i think generally is those things take a long time to do their joint venture you try to not pick winners and losers. This happens been issued that always seems to be getting in the way that solidly we can settle this and have rules that are sustainable and get that out of politics and then we can go and look at the rewrite of the telecommunications act. Host what other issues the focus on besides the current one, the big one, Net Neutrality . Guest anything that impacts the internet economy. One of the great things about our companies, this is a great export. Thats been a real priority for this admin station on treating jobs and helping our economy grow and our companies and industry is one where say 80 of the value in jobs are here in the United States but 80 of users around the world. This is something were exported. Care a lot about tray. Wwhen lucas on the tray just lie nafta and the previous deals, internet was a part of that. Digital conference was a part of that. Those are things that we updated that we are working on. We care about access to market issues, uber, airbnb and home away. We work with them to make sure theyre able to compete and getting to markets across the country. Host all of these countries yet named have Washington Office is now. Guest . Com. We have 40 companies and some do, some dont. Host does washington, whats relationship between washington and Silicon Valley . To the understand each other . Guest were getting there. Its changed a lot even in the five years weve been run as an association. Theres a recognition of Internet Companies in Silicon Valley just to say it like that. That decisions that get made in capital washington, d. C. , the state capitals across the country matter to the bottom line of her companies and matter to the ability to grow and provide Great Service and create jobs and grow our economy. We run into in some cases loss at a been on the books since the 1970s or 80s that didnt anticipate the Innovative Companies and the internet. Sometimes those needs updating to allow for the growth we have seen. Sometimes we see new laws get put into trying to stifle competition and keep them out. Again when you divide that. In the last few years theres been a recognition to make sure our industry is understood and went our voice in washington and run the country. Given the change in administration how would you say your companies, your Member Companies have kind of change their engagement in washington with trump and the white house . Guest its an interesting to look at, one issue is bipartisan. We go back and forth on that and theres something for republicans and democrats also love based on what our companies are doing. The difference is a lot of our members, you can think about how quickly the industry has grown and company sai set up, probably been around during a previous president , president obama. Most of the companies on the new president obama. We have a new president now and were going to work with the Trump Administration in the same way that we did with the Obama Administration and then will have another admin station after that, after that, after that. Our companies can work with everybody and we will. Theres immigration issues were tech countries have come up for his tongue against of the administration policies. How does that kind of effect building relationships and finding Common Ground . Guest and we should. Just like in the Obama Administration when the issues we with him on. Our companies were vocal in their disagreement and make sure they were heard. When there were issues we agreed on you Work Together to find consensus income greater that the same thing with the trumpet message. Our companies are very vocal and observation which is great. Thats what democracy is all about. When theres a reason, graham brabson trade and other issues we will be at the table working with him to do whats best for the country. What you see other than trade, other other areas where you can find some Common Ground, a gun contact reform, taxable . Guest taxi from is an important one. Updating the tax code. Trade i wouldnt say, i would minimize the importance of that. Each was a key issue. Generally our Companies Work best in a light touch environment which this administration will support. Host any issue with easing on mergers . Guest we try to stay out of