「網路中立性」(network neutrality)原則近年來成為法學界、科技界和產業界共同關注的議題,其原因在於其不僅牽動科技發展方向和產業利益,也和法學界向來關注的民主和人權問題,無法脫離關係。對網路中立性原則持反對立場者認為,落實網路中立性原則的規範,要求網路服務業者在傳輸任何網路訊息時,都不得進行任何差別待遇,乃是侵犯了網路服務業者裁量自身是否承載特定訊息的「言論自由」權利。相對地,支持網路中立性原則者,則是認為應該在當前的通訊傳播法制中落實此一原則,因為,以網路服務業者所扮演的角色來說,對於不同的網路應用服務和內容予以差別待遇的作法,放在民主社會維護言論自由的基本架構下,是不能容忍的,諸如此類的差別待遇,其實正是侵犯了一般大眾的「資訊取得自由」,而資訊取得自由,也是言論自由裡相當重要的一環,欠缺了資訊取得自由,民主程序即無從健全發展。為了釐清上述爭議,本文將從言論自由的分析出發,探討網路中立性原則的憲法意義。本文首先說明網路中立性原則的意義、重要性及其引發的爭議重點,其次,本文將從歷史發展的角度,說明美國國會及通訊傳播主管機關FCC為了落實網路中立性原則所採取的行動,以及其司法評價為何,以做為本文以下的分析基礎。本文進而從言論自由的觀點出發,分析寬頻服務業者和網路服務業者在面對網路中立性原則及其相關規範時,提出哪些言論自由的主張來護衛自己的立場,以及這些主張在美國聯邦最高法院判決立場下,究竟應該如何解讀,以便闡明美國聯邦最高法院的判決立場,對於網路中立性原則的落實,會帶來哪些困境。接著,本文進一步從網路發展方向對於資訊自由和民主發展的角度出發,討論網路中立性原則的言論自由意涵,以及上述困境如何解決,最後則是第陸部分的結論。
Much of the policy debate and scholarly literature on the principle of ”Network Neutrality” (Net Neutrality) in the United States has addressed whether the Federal Communications Commission (”FCC”) has statutory authority to require Broadband Service Providers (BSPs) or Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to operate in a nondiscriminatory manner. Such analysis largely focuses on questions about jurisdiction, the scope of lawful regulation, and the balance of power between stakeholders without much thought about broader concerns such as First Amendment values. For their part, BSPs and ISPs have aggressively advocated for First Amendment speaker rights when selecting content and applications, packaging them into easily accessible and user-friendly format. This Paper focuses on the constitutional analysis and responds to the First Amendment assertions favoring the position of BSPs and ISPs. First, this Paper explains the definition of Net Neutrality, followed by a review of the regulatory history of the principle of Net Neutrality and the role played by Internet Intermediaries, such as BSPs and ISPs. Second, this Paper examines the legal rationale that supported and opposed the principle of Net Neutrality by examining relevant regulatory efforts of the FCC, legislative initiatives in Congress, and the implications of judicial decisions concerning the implementation of Net Neutrality. Third, this Paper considers what we can learn about Net Neutrality through the lens of Free Speech decisions made by the Supreme Court. This Paper concludes current telecommunication and media regulatory models and Supreme Court decisions provide inconsistent and incomplete direction on the future of Net Neutrality. The paper provides some observations as to how we shall approach the principle of Net Neutrality in the spirit of promoting First Amendment values while imposing reasonable nondiscrimination responsibilities on BSPs and ISPs.