September 2011

Network Neutrality: Effective November 20?

Federal Register publication of the network neutrality order has been teed up for September 23 with an effective date of November 20, 2011 for the new rules.

Of course, nothing will be official until the actual publication occurs, but it’s looking like Sept 23 will be the day. Whenever Federal Register publication does occur, it will mark the beginning (but only the beginning) of the next phase of the process. Publication is the starting gun for petitions for reconsideration (due at the FCC within 30 days of Federal Register publication) and initiation of appellate review (due at any U.S. Court of Appeals within 60 days of publication). It’s also possible that some parties may seek a stay of the effectiveness of the rules – obviously, those efforts would have to be cranked up prior to the effective date.

Prioritizing 911 Calls and Enabling Consumers to Send Text, Photos, Video and Data to 911 Call Centers During Emergencies

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is seeking comment on ways to modernize the current voice-based 911 system to a Next Generation 911 (NG911) system that will enable the public to send texts, photos, videos, and other data to 911 call centers. As a result of the East Coast earthquake on August 23, 2011, the Commission also sought comment on whether and how to prioritize calls to 911 over other calls during emergencies, which are usually the moments when wireless networks experience the most congestion and calls fail to go through.

The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking examines short-term and long-term options for enabling consumers to send texts to 911, including the advantages and disadvantages of different approaches. The FCC is also seeking comment on long-term development of multimedia NG911 technology that would support delivery of photos, videos, and data to 911, in addition to texting. The Commission will consider the appropriate role for the agency in facilitating – and, if necessary, accelerating – the rollout of these capabilities, and encouraging the parallel development of NG911 capabilities in 911 call centers. The FCC also noted that the transition to NG911 is not likely to occur uniformly across the country and asked for comment on how best to educate the public about the availability, capabilities, and limitations of NG911 as it is deployed.

The FCC's Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau also presented a cost study on NG911 network connectivity costs. Bureau staff analysis determined that NG911, because of its ability to leverage commercial off-the-shelf technology, has the potential to be more cost-effective to operate and upgrade than the legacy 911 system. The study offers two models for NG911 deployment: a baseline model and a cost-effective model that assumes cost savings from a reduction in the total number of 911 call centers nationwide and a greater percentage of call centers sharing NG911 infrastructure as opposed to operating their own dedicated systems.

Deployable Aerial Communications Architecture

The Federal Communications Commission’s Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau released a comprehensive white paper outlining a vision for how “deployable aerial communications architecture” (DACA) can be used to provide communications following a catastrophic event when the terrestrial communications infrastructure is severely damaged or unavailable. The white paper includes recommendations to the Commission for next steps on how to incorporate this technology into the Nation's communications infrastructure.

The paper offers an analysis of how DACA could fit into the restoration of communications services in the early hours immediately after a catastrophic event. DACA is deployable 12 to 18 hours after a catastrophic event to restore critical communications, including broadband, temporarily for a period of 72 hours or more. This capability would be useful in situations where the power grid may be inoperable for several days, depleting back-up power supplies and resulting in an almost complete failure of landline, cellular, public safety radio, broadcast, and cable transmissions, as well as Wi-Fi and Internet services.

Based on their conclusions in the white paper, the Bureau recommended several steps for further Commission action:

Open an inquiry by the end of the year to gather data and address issues such as the role of DACA solutions during catastrophic disasters, radio interference, spectrum coordination, authorization requirements, costs, cost-effectiveness, equipment standards, and operational procedures.
Host a workshop on DACA solutions by the end of 2011.
Share findings with the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Federal Aviation Administration, and other Federal partners to initiate discussions regarding pilot programs and implementation.
Working with the Department of State and other appropriate Federal agencies, explore any international implications of these issues.

FCC adviser Daniel Ornstein leaving the agency

Daniel Ornstein, who served as an adviser to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski will be leaving the agency.

Ornstein was the first person Chairman Genachowski recruited to the FCC in May 2010, and has been responsible for strategic planning and operations within the Chairman’s Office. He has also worked on a range of policy matters, including spectrum initiatives, media and Internet policy transaction reviews. He is also credited with playing a key role in the developing online video conditions for the Comcast-NBC transaction. Ornstein has yet to make a decision on where he will head next, but will rejoin the private sector.

Sprint customers new and old get hotspot data cap of 5GB

Say goodbye to real and true unlimited data, Sprint customers: the company will start capping data used via phone hotspot to 5GB per month. Even existing customers won't be exempt from the new cap, and will be migrated to a new plan enforcing the limit after a friendly reminder from their carrier. Under the new rule, Sprint’s formerly unlimited mobile hotspot feature will remain the same price at $29.99 per month, but will allot only 5GB of data. Once that amount is used, customers will be charged $0.05 per megabyte. Sprint notes that tablets acting as hotspots are exempt from the data limit. The plan goes into effect October 2 for new customers. In an internal document, Sprint notes that existing customers will be notified via bill messages or postcards “being sent in October and November” that they will be forcibly migrated to the new plan, effective on the first day of the next bill cycle after they receive their notice.

Free Press Research Director S. Derek Turner said, "Sprint’s actions are another troubling symptom of a mobile broadband market that lacks meaningful competition, and this move is the latest in a race to the bottom among mobile providers to see who can squeeze the most out of its customers. This anti-consumer overcharging scheme bears no rational relation to the actual costs of delivering data, which are estimated to be mere pennies per gigabyte. This move is a poor solution to an unproven problem, and it will have a chilling effect on economic growth and innovation online. When ISPs force their customers to watch the meter by overcharging so much, experimentation and innovation suffer. This is a giant leap backward for one of the few growing sectors of the national economy."

Could #ATTMobile Trial Be Only Act I?

[Commentary] US District Judge Ellen Huvelle made it clear yesterday she will be a strict traffic cop for the Justice Department's (DoJ) challenge to AT&T's takeover of T-Mobile. The trial will start next Feb. 13, splitting the difference between AT&T, which wanted a January start, and DoJ, which wanted March. Regardless of how the Justice Department's case comes out, however, one valuable lesson has already become clear. This country is only one deal away, two at most, of seeing the emergence of a new-age telecommunications industrial trust with power not seen since the old Bell System was broken up. It was not certain whether the Obama Administration would challenge AT&T's audacious move to wipe out a competitor. That's a slender reed on which to hang an industry as basic to our economy as telecommunications. If we had a Republican administration, there is no question that deal would have scooted through the Justice Department and the Federal Communications Commission with nary a peep of protest because that's how Republicans (and, to be fair, many Democrats) roll these days -- any which way big business wants.

It would not be surprising that as DoJ staff attorneys review their case files after this AT&T trial, it will become clear that while keeping AT&T from buying T-Mobile helped maintain competition in the wireless business, the only solution to the larger, competitive problem is divestiture -- that the conglomerates be required to spin off their wireless operations. That way, the wireless operations formerly of AT&T and Verizon would have to deal at the same arms-length basis with AT&T and Verizon wired companies that other cellular companies do. Such a step would also make clear that each technology would have to stand on its own, without one subsidizing the other or creating a tilted playing field (the opposite of a level playing field). Such a breakup, of wireline and wireless, would be the 2011 equivalent of the local/long-distance breakup of 1984.

How Did Google Do In Its Senate Performance?

It was not going to be a good day for Google. There is nothing positive about having your former CEO dragged before attention-seeking politicians while competitors crow that you've grown too big for your britches. The best the search giant could hope for was that Eric Schmidt did not make any unforced errors and that it would be able to control at least part of the ensuing media narrative. By these criteria, Google’s bad day before the Senate could have been much worse.

During the hearing, Chairman Eric Schmidt not only avoided any Bill Gates’ type mistakes but also got some media traction for the counter-narrative that Google is putting forth to make the regulators go away. Under this narrative, Google is a humble company that will not turn into a monopolistic bully. The firm has to be pleased that the press gave prominent play to Schmidt’s line. Schmidt was also effective in reminding the committee that Google is both a jobs machine and popular with many Americans.

Whether Google is a monopoly isn't the point

Much has been made of Google chairman Eric Schmidt’s admission that the web giant might be a monopoly, during his testimony before a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee. But despite the howls of outrage at Google’s size and dominance in the search market, the fact remains that — for the purposes of U.S. antitrust law at least — being a monopoly isn't illegal.

What is illegal is either acquiring that monopoly by nefarious or anticompetitive means, or using that dominant position in a way that harms the market for those services. The problem with applying that to Google is that even if you assume it has a monopoly and is being anticompetitive, it’s not at all clear how that is bad for consumers.

Low power TV organizations taking their fight to Washington

The Coalition for Free TV and Broadband and the National Translator Association are teaming up and heading to Washington to meet with members of the House Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet. Their goal: to make sure Class A TVs, LPTVs and TV translators are not lost in the spectrum auction shuffle.

Representatives of the two organizations also plan to check in with people at the FCC and at public interest groups to make their case. Television broadcasters in general are concerned about whether spectrum auctions will be truly voluntary, whether they will be fairly compensated for any changes necessitated by channel repacking, and whether channel repacking is even possible in some markets without killing off some affected television stations. The situation is probably more worrisome for low power licensees, who are regarded by the FCC as providers of secondary television service and generally are not afforded the same protections as their full-power colleagues.

Clearwire CFO: Would Consider Selling Some Spectrum If Approached

Clearwire's chief financial officer said the company would consider selling some of its spectrum if the right opportunity arose.

Clearwire has benefited from rapid adoption of its 4G wireless services, but it has also faced a cash crunch that has forced it to slash costs and consider selling unused spectrum to further its growth plans. The recently company scrapped plans to sell spectrum after receiving funding in other ways, including by settling a pricing dispute with Sprint Nextel, its majority owner and largest wholesale customer. Chief Financial Officer Hope Cochran said during an investor conference that while Clearwire isn't trying to sell its spectrum, it would "opportunistically look at it" if approached by a potential buyer. "The spectrum is a great asset, and we have a lot of it," she said. "It would be difficult [for us] to utilize all of it." Cochran said the company previously considered selling spectrum but ended up not needing to as the debt markets were "friendly." But the scarcity of spectrum is becoming more apparent and the assets are rising in value, she added.

Benton

Search