Telecom & Cable Regulation

FCC Releases Broadband Data Order For Census-Tract Data

by on June 16, 2008 · 9 comments

WASHINGTON, June 15 – In an effort to increase the data that the Federal Communications Commission has available as it designs broadband policies, on Thursday the FCC ordered broadband providers to provide the agency with more detailed information.

For the past eight years, broadband providers had to provide the FCC with semi-annual information about the number of subscribers that they have in each ZIP code. Now, they will need to provide the number of subscribers in each Census tract, too.

In a last-minute change sought by AT&T and the non-profit group Free Press, the FCC decided to also require broadband carriers to separate out the number of business from residential customers.

Additionally, under a new form created by the broadband data order, carriers must also say how many of their subscribers within each Census tract fit into each of eight separate speed tiers.

Continue reading →

SHARE: 9 comments

Reporting from Broadband Policy Summit at BroadbandCensus.com

by on June 15, 2008 · 7 comments

Today I’ve filed several articles on BroadbandCensus.com with extensive coverage from the Broadband Policy Summit last Thursday and Friday. You can also see the links to these stories and others on broadband, at the home page of BroadbandCensus.com.

Check back at BroadbandCensus.com on Monday morning, when I’ll be posting material about the Federal Communications Commission’s Friday decision on broadband data issues.

Comcast-BitTorrent, Wireless Net Neutrality Issues Stir Debate at Broadband Policy Summit

June 14 – Critics and proponents of Network Neutrality squaring off on the topic on Friday agreed that recent actions by both cable and wireless providers had had re-vivified the debate about the topic. read more

Ambassador: U.S. Wireless Policies Emulated by Developing Nations

June 13 – America’s wireless policies continue to be emulated by developing nations, Ambassador David Gross, United States coordinator for international communications and information policy, said Friday. read more

Rep. Cliff Sterns Decries Net Neutrality Rules

June 12 – Rep. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., decried the move to impose Network Neutrality on broadband carriers, speaking at a keynote luncheon address at the Broadband Policy Summit IV here. read more

Questions about Broadband Data Swirl at Broadband Policy Summit

June 12 – Questions about the availability and detail of broadband data featured prominently in presentations and in discussions at Thursday’s sessions of Broadband Policy Summit IV. read more

SHARE: 7 comments

New York AG pressures ISPs to cut off Usenet access

by on June 11, 2008 · 24 comments

Time Warner, Verizon, and Sprint will restrict access to tens of thousands of Newsgroups in order to stem illegal child pornography as part of an agreement with New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo announced yesterday. Although ISPs have no obligation to provide newsgroup access, and there are plenty of alternative methods for users to browse Usenet discussion groups, the agreement raises serious Constitutional questions.

The agreement is supposedly “voluntary,” but this doesn’t necessarily resolve all First Amendment concerns. Hans Bader, CEI’s Counsel for Special Projects, posted a good overview on the Constitutional implications of the New York announcement over at OpenMarket.org:

“In truth, the settlement blocking access to newsgroups is not really “voluntary.”  It’s the coercive result of threats of litigation from the New York Attorney General’s office.  Supposedly “voluntary” settlements can constitute government regulation that violates the constitution.   The Supreme Court has said that even a State’s “contractual condition” is subject to constitutional scrutiny (See South-Central Timber Dev. Co. v. Wunnicke, 467 U.S. 87, 97 n.10 (1984)), and federal appeals courts have observed that the fact that a state official and a business “have entered into an agreement does not necessarily insulate it from scrutiny under” the Constitution.  (See Automated Salvage Transport, Inc. v. Wheelabrator Ent’l Sys. Inc., 155 F.3d 59, 78 (2d Cir. 1998)).  And a “voluntary agreement” incorporated into a consent decree can constitute state regulation that is preempted by federal law, as the Supreme Court observed in 1981.  (Ridgway v. Ridgway, 454 U.S. 46, 47, 53 (1981)).

This isn’t the first time Andrew Cuomo has pressured firms to engage in online censorship. Back in October 2007, I discussed how Facebook “voluntarily” agreed to censor user content to reduce the chances that minors would encounter obscene images.

Mr. Cuomo seems awfully effective at persuading providers to curtail user speech–perhaps he made an offer the ISPs couldn’t refuse.

SHARE: 24 comments

Michael Powell and Reed Hundt Find Their Inner Politico

by on June 10, 2008 · 3 comments

Michael Powell seems to have finally found his political voice. Reed Hundt probably never lost his. But both former FCC chairmen got into the spirit of debate at the Federalist Society gathering today at the National Press Club. Reporters William Korver and Cassandre Durocher, of BroadbandCensus.com, were present to record the exchange.

The story is just the most recent of a stream of news articles on broadband-related subject available for free at BroadbandCensus.com. As TLF readers may be aware, the goal of BroadbandCensus.com is to collect user-generated data — otherwise known as “crowdsourcing” — through inviting individual Internet users’ to contribute to our publicly-available database of local broadband information, all sorted by ZIP code.

Now, we’re pleased to announce that we are also following technology and communications policy news in Washington, and elsewhere, through daily reporting. If you haven’t been to BroadbandCensus.com, I encourage you to do so. And don’t forget to Take the Broadband Census!

Read Net Neutrality Disagreement Between Two Former FCC Chairmen at BroadbandCensus.com

SHARE: 3 comments

Exclusive Handset Prohibitions: Should the FCC Kill the Goose that Laid the Golden iPhone?

by on June 10, 2008 · 17 comments

Goose that lays golden eggsIn a new PFF essay, my colleague Barbara Esbin and I address a recent petition filed by the Rural Cellular Association (RCA) asking the FCC to prohibit exclusive arrangements between wireless handset producers and carriers. The RCA petition claims that large wireless companies have an unfair market advantage by giving their customers exclusive access to certain advanced smart phones, such as the Apple/AT&T iPhone—and that this anticompetitive practice is harmful to rural consumers served by RCA members.

In the piece, we debunk RCA’s arguments premised on a supposed lack of competition in wireless markets. RCA will likely now redouble these arguments by pointing to Verizon’s planned acquisition of Alltel (by far the smallest of the “Big 5” carriers), which was announced the day our piece was published. But even with four large carriers instead of five, the wireless market remains vibrantly competitive—especially as compared to 1992, when the FCC decided that even the two-carrier market was “extremely competitive,” and rejecting arguments that it ban exclusive handset arrangements. Continue reading →

SHARE: 17 comments

FCC targets long-term service plans

by on June 9, 2008 · 8 comments

Are you a mobile phone user, FiOS TV subscriber, or DirecTV customer who’s happy with your service and bound by a long-term contract? If so, then brace for higher prices thanks to a multifaceted regulatory assault on voluntary contracts.

On June 12, the FCC will hold a hearing to consider imposing regulations on early termination fees, which are the charges that customers who’ve entered into long-term service agreements must pay if they choose to end service prior to the culmination of their contract term.

The FCC isn’t alone in its push to regulate early termination fees. Bills that would limit wireless contract terms have been drafted in both the Senate (by Sens. Klobuchar and Rockefeller) and in the House (by Rep. Markey). And Verizon, among other carriers, faces a $1 billion class-action lawsuit arguing its early termination fees are illegal.

While the bills pending in Congress focus solely on early termination fees for mobile service, the Washington Post reports that the FCC’s upcoming hearing will encompass early termination fees offered by all kinds of consumer telecom services. In addition to wireless companies, many broadband and video providers including DirecTV, Verizon, RCN, and Comcast also offer long-term service plans with cancellation charges levied on customers who end service early.

In late 2007, when the early termination fee debate began heating up, many providers changed their policies to address complaints against wireless contract provisions. Now, AT&T Mobility, Verizon Wireless, and Sprint all prorate early termination fees for wireless subscribers, so users who cancel service in the middle of the contract term don’t have to pay the full $175 early termination fee. The three carriers have also begun allowing customers to change calling plans without affecting their contract end date.

Despite intensifying opposition to early termination fees, these fees are really nothing new. Outside of high-tech services, consumers have long had the choice of signing long-term contracts that involve early cancellation charges. Renters typically sign 12-month apartment leases, and are usually required to pay a breakage fee if they back out of their lease early. Similar contract clauses are often found in fitness center memberships and automobile leases. Are all these incarnations of early termination fees fair game for government regulation, too?

Dictating the terms of telecommunications service contracts runs the risk of depressing investment in network modernization, ultimately harming consumers. At a time when Sprint is building a high-speed wireless network from the ground up, Verizon is laying fiber to millions of homes across the nation, and DirecTV is expanding its fleet of geosynchronous orbital satellites, government-imposed revenue volatility would delay next-generation telecom services that promise faster broadband speeds and more high-def programming.

Continue reading →

SHARE: 8 comments

Cuban on bandwidth hogs and tiered broadband

by on June 5, 2008 · 15 comments

In his own special way, the always-provocative Mark Cuban throws down the gauntlet on bandwidth hogs:

When it comes to broadband internet access, you can have speed or large volumes of data transfer. You can’t have both. One certainty in the broadband world is that for those of us with cable or DSL modems connecting us to the internet, there is still a finite amount of bandwidth available. When a user consumes a disproportionate and significant amount of bandwidth, it can and will slow down everyone. I hate that.

If the choice is between your being able to download more movies or other video and my getting the best possible speed from my internet connection, I’m thrilled when you get kicked off. It can’t happen soon enough. Speed is what I need. Take all your P2P downloads and get the hell off my internet.

I have no sympathy for bandwidth hogs. You all are productivity killers for the rest of us. People who are working, people who are trying to play games, people who are in virtual worlds, people who are networking, people who are just trying to watch a Youtube video or their favorite TV show, you all are the reason why we get incredibly annoyed by slowdowns and buffering.

Leave and take your bit torrent client with you.

Well, we’re not quite that hard-nosed about it here, but we’ve written a few things about broadband metering / tiering that you might find of interest: Drew, Cord, Ryan, and me (1, 2, 3, 4, 5).

SHARE: 15 comments

Build a Better Mousetrap

by on May 22, 2008 · 5 comments

The Rural Cellular Association wants the FCC to eliminate exclusivity arrangements between cellphone carriers and manufacturers of popular handsets.

For many consumers, the end result of these exclusive arrangements is being channeled to purchase wireless service from a carrier that has monopolistic control over the desired handset and having to pay a premium price for the handset because the market is devoid of any competition for the particular handset.

Exclusivity deals are common throughout the business world and often serve procompetitive purposes.  And there is no way to condemn AT&T-Apple iPhone, Verizon Wireless-LG Voyager or Sprint Nextel-Samsung Ace without condemning exclusivity generally.  For one thing, there are five major cellphone carriers and many smaller competitors.  AT&T (Mobility), the largest, has an approximate market share of only 26 percent.  You can’t argue this is a concentrated market.  The only thing unique about this market is the unnecessary presence of a legacy regulator.

The obvious course of action for the rural carriers is to partner with a handset manufacturer and develop something of their own which customers will want.  “If you build a better mousetrap…,” as they say.  Perhaps some rural carriers lack the imagination or the ingenuity.  But it’s really not the job of government to try to compensate for that. 

Continue reading →

SHARE: 5 comments

Why Are Some Muni WiFi Experiments Failing?

by on May 19, 2008 · 13 comments

Not all muni wi-fi experiments are failing, but some rather important ones seem to be in serious trouble. EarthLink is abandoning the Philadelphia wifi network, which so many people placed great faith in 3 years ago. And MetroFi is selling muni Wi-Fi networks in Portland and other cities. I’ve been reading some stories and commentaries about what’s gone wrong, but I’d be interested in hearing others offer up their thoughts here. Here are a few general explanations that I’ve culled from these reports for you to build on, or just offer your own:

1. Wrong technology: Need to wait for WiMax or something more efficient (scalable) than WiFi.
2. Lack of demand, Part 1: Existing broadband providers are filling whatever need is out there.
3. Lack of demand, Part 2: Just not as many people want broadband as policymakers think.
4. Lack of investment or competence, Part 1: The private contractors didn’t know what they were doing or just didn’t invest the necessary resources.
5. Lack of investment or competence, Part 2: The local government didn’t know what they were doing or just didn’t have the heart in it.
6. Lack of awareness: Municipalities and corporate partners failed to promote the benefits of the systems.
7. Private machinations: It’s a conspiracy by private interests to quash the competition!
8. Wait, they’re not failing: We just need to give them more time to pan out.
9. Others???

SHARE: 13 comments

Where is the FCC’s Annual Video Competition Report?

by on May 15, 2008 · 1 comment

Barbara Esbin and I have just released a short PFF essay asking the question: “Where is the FCC’s Annual Video Competition Report?” The FCC is required to produce this report annually and yet the last one is well over a year past due and the data is contains will be over two years old by the time it comes out. I’ve embedded our paper about this below.

SHARE: 1 comment

← Previous Entries

Next Entries →