A federal appeals court ruled against the Federal Communications Commission this week in a decision that could jeopardize a free and open mobile Internet.

The court ruled that FCC regulators could not step in to prevent Comcast from slowing or blocking its cable customers? access to the BitTorrent file-sharing service. In the wake of the decision, Internet service providers and carriers can charge sites that require large amounts of data, including video sites such as YouTube, in the name of speeding up content delivery.

?The concern being proposed by Google and over-the-top providers is that this ruling will allow Internet access providers like Comcast, Verizon and AT&T to pare back or discriminate against certain Web sites and certain content,? said Alex Winogradoff, New York-based vice president of research at Gartner. ?The recent opinion by the court had to do with Comcast, it?s really a Comcast case, but the decision does say the FCC does not have the authority to impose restrictions on Comcast and their ability to control their network.

?That was the extent of it but people are interpreting it to be much more,? he said. ?The ruling does apply to the fixed side as well as the mobile side of the telecom business.

?The court said the FCC does not have any authority over Web traffic, in a limited sense, that the FCC could not interfere with Comcast?s network management policies, but people are taking it way out of context.?

The court decision needs to be taken in the full context of all the six principles that the FCC has put in place regarding net neutrality, the first four of which have been effect since August 2005 and that have been used in two cases to bring in line certain violators, including Comcast.

As part of the U.S. Federal Communications Commission?s action to deregulate broadband access, the FCC on August 5, 2005, adopted four ?Network Neutrality? principles designed "to encourage broadband deployment and preserve and promote the open and interconnected nature of the public Internet."

These principles were left intentionally vague and have not been adopted as enforceable rules.

(1) People are entitled to access the legal Internet content of their choice.

(2) They are entitled to run applications and services of their choice, subject to the requirements of the law.

(3) People are entitled to connect legal devices of their choice that do not harm the network.

(4) Consumers are entitled to competition among network providers, application and service providers, and content providers.

The FCC recognizes that unreasonably impeding the performance of an Internet application such as peer-to-peer file sharing and not just outright blocking a particular Web site or program violates the FCC?s Internet policies.

The FCC requires that Internet providers inform their customers when they make important technical decisions that change how the Internet works.

And the FCC does give consumers who feel their Internet experience is being unreasonably interfered with a right to seek help at the commission.

The FCC does not, however, prohibit carriers from reasonably managing their networks.

And the FCC does not prevent engineers?either now or in the future?from coming up with new and better ways to serve their customers.

On September 21, 2009, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski proposed two additional Net Neutrality Principles:

(5) Prevent Internet access providers from discriminating against particular Internet content or applications, while allowing for reasonable network management.

(6) Ensure that Internet access providers are transparent about the network management practices they implement.

?Currently there are no rules?the FCC has principles as opposed to rules?but it?s been a very effective way of managing the openness of the Internet but at the same time no one like Comcast is doing anything against those principles,? Mr. Winogradoff said.

?They don?t have any real FCC rules that would in effect codify specific limitations?they don?t exist and in my estimation they don?t need to exist because things have been working very well,? he said.

That said, there is speculation that Congress could respond to the court ruling by passing legislation giving the FCC explicit authority to regulate wired and mobile Internet service.

?The open Internet is in trouble, because network providers are saying that 15-to-20 percent of customers on the Internet are driving 80-to-90 percent of the traffic, which is a problem they need to deal with going forward,? Mr. Winogradoff said. ?Others may not be able to have their services developed as quickly because a few users are loading down the network too heavily.

?The FCC has been able to bring violators in, start a discussion and make sure principles are not violated?the point is it?s been working, and no one can say the issue of the industry violating some of these principles have not been dealt with quickly,? he said.

Since the decision was announced, Comcast and the FCC have come to an agreement: Comcast will inform its customers about their legal rights with regard to Internet usage.

Almost all of the contracts from ISPs specify the maximum throughput allowed over a month?s period of time.

?That?s true for mobile as well as the fixed access world,? Mr. Winogradoff said. ?Whatever affects the fixed access world will also affect the mobile side.

?The FCC is looking at both the same way?they want to make sure there is sufficient mobile broadband deployment available to as many people as possible,? he said.

?They will monitor mobile broadband performance and make sure carriers are not advantaging their main clients versus those that do not pay them any fees.?