Over the past few weeks, the debate on Internet regulation has once again been thrust into the media spotlight. Largely driven by political events in Europe, these debates have centred upon the rapid development of the Internet and the level of regulation required to effectively govern it. Indeed, it’s the whole question of governance and the comments made by President Sarkozy at the e-G8 that have brought this topic bubbling to the fore. President Sarkozy’s hard-line stance that governments need to be responsible for developing and enforcing stricter digital laws comes at a time when sensitivity on Internet freedom is still high. In his speech, Sarkozy stated that Internet companies have to know where the red line is.

Sarkozy’s firm approach seems to be somewhat at odds with that of Neelie Kroes, the European Commissioner for the Digital Agenda. Speaking at the first ever Digital Agenda Assembly earlier in June, Kroes seemed to distance herself from Sarkozy’s comments, suggesting that a ‘keyhole approach, rather than amputation’ was required towards regulation. Indeed, Kroes’ speech tried to eschew the issue of regulation altogether and focused more on rallying Europe’s digerati, encouraging them to embrace a new wave of innovation. However, Kroes was quick to highlight the challenges ahead, stating that high-speed broadband is the ‘bridge to Europe’s future’ and that we need to think outside of the box to overcome any impeding obstacles.

I’m always impressed by Kroes ability to motivate and inspire. Of all the European diplomats to discuss the Internet and the digital era, Kroes appears to understand what’s required to move the EU forward. An element of this is encouraging Internet freedom: A freedom to explore, to innovate and to build. This was a theme echoed by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) at its June meeting. The emphasis here was on the need for an open Internet where information is free to flow. The OECD is quick to note that without this, we’re potentially harming our opportunities for economic development. There can be no question that Internet companies want to see this freedom fostered on a global level and from a business perspective it’s understandable to see why. However, governments and regulation bodies are proving a little more cautious.

Yet while the dialogue between governments, Internet companies and other key stakeholders continues to develop, it appears that we are finally seeing progress on one of the key regulatory issues – net neutrality. Earlier last week, the FCC’s net neutrality rules were sent to the Office of Management and Budget on their final step towards becoming law. It’s expected that within the next month, we’ll see these rules pass through the Federal Register and into being. The finalisation of the FCC’s net neutrality law comes hot on the heels of new regulations in Chile and the Netherlands also aimed at keeping the Internet a one-tier system where all Internet packets are treated equally.

While it’s encouraging to see net neutrality rules moving forward, I cannot help but wonder how political demands for greater regulation will impact upon our networks. As I mentioned in an earlier post, we’re at the first stage of an optical reboot, the rebuilding of our networks to accommodate the continued enormous bandwidth explosion. Yet for us to truly embrace the possibilities of global connectivity and all it  enables, it’s critical that we are universally aligned on how to move forward. The question is: how do we achieve this? I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on this. What are the challenges that we need to overcome? Do we need greater regulations or should the Internet remain open?