The strength or weakness of proposed internet rules for net neutrality could rest in the interpretation of just one word, reports the Washington Post: "reasonable." The way that word is defined can tilt fortunes in the web economy and set the course for how consumers use the web today and in the future, proponets of the policy say. Now, a group of law professors and public-interest groups are telling the Federal Communications Commission that its proposed rules don't sufficiently define what that word means for internet service providers like AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon as they management traffic on their networks. In a letter to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, the legal scholars -- all long-time proponents of net neutrality -- are asking the agency to clear up ambiguity on "reasonable network management" practices in a draft of rules. "We trust Genachowski," said Tim Wu, a law professor at Columbia University who co-wrote the letter. "But this is a historic rule, and this letter was in the spirit of ... creating a stronger rule that sets a policy that lasts longer, as opposed to something that is highly dependent on the whims of a commission in power." As the proposed rules are written, they say, internet service providers can work around loose interpretations of reasonable network management. There aren't clear standards in the draft rules for what is considered reasonable. This could allow ISPs to act as gatekeepers of the web, giving greater priority to their own services over competitors, they say...

Click here for the full story