November 2012

Email Users Can't Count On Privacy Protections

There's one safe assumption on the Internet: Email isn't safe. One of the lessons from the unfolding case of the former director of the Central Intelligence Agency, David Petraeus, is that privacy protections for even the most sophisticated users of consumer-email services actually protect very little.

In response to a Florida woman's complaints that she had received threatening emails, the Federal Bureau of Investigation gained access to the emails of Paula Broadwell, a writer who allegedly set up Gmail accounts under aliases to conduct an affair with Mr. Petraeus. To do so, the FBI received search warrants from a judge, according to U.S. officials. But other clues in the FBI investigation could be garnered without a warrant in an era when personal communication has shifted to centralized websites like Google and Facebook, where messages rarely get truly deleted and all online communications carry a number of digital footprints. "If the director of central intelligence isn't able to successfully keep his emails private, what chance do I have?" said Kurt Opsahl, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital-liberties advocacy group.

How do you know if your broadband meter is accurate?

When happens when your Internet service provider (ISP) says you’re going over your broadband cap, but your own self-installed usage meter still says you have plenty of gigabytes left?

That’s what Ken Stox is about to find out, as he takes on his ISP to try to figure out why his own usage numbers are 20 percent to 30 percent lower than those provided by AT&T. I’ve emailed the FCC to see if the agency is aware of Stox’s issue and if it had reached out to either Stox or AT&T for more information. For Stox, the problem is that AT&T won’t share any of its methodology with him. To him AT&T’s ability to charge him $10 for more Internet access just because he’s hit some cap that’s defined by AT&T and overseen by AT&T without any required disclosure seems anti-consumer. So far, he hasn’t filed a complaint with the FCC, or with the Illinois Commerce Commission, but he did say he had been contacted by Public Knowledge and he might wait for their advice before making any formal complaint. Already the advocacy organization is using the case as an example of why the FCC needs to get more involved in monitoring and asking questions data caps.

Regulators weigh demands for Google

How far will Google go to head off the threat of long and damaging antitrust battles on both sides of the Atlantic – and how hard will regulators push to cramp its expansive style? The answers to those questions should become clearer in the next few weeks, as the European Commission and the US Federal Trade Commission press the company for voluntary changes in its business model to end their antitrust investigations.

Rivals want radical action, perhaps even extending to a break-up of Google into separate companies that handle search and other services. The likely outcome, though, is more minimalist. The most important issues involve search “fairness”. Does Google give undue prominence to its own services, such as maps and comparison shopping, robbing other sites of all-important search traffic? And does it discriminate against some sites by relegating them in its rankings? This could play out very differently in Europe and the US.

LightSquared's Plan B, Out for Comment

The Federal Communications Commission has requested comment on a Petition for Rulemaking filed by LightSquared seeking a new co-primary allocation permitting non-Federal terrestrial mobile use of the 1675-1680 MHz band.

You remember LightSquared – the company that wanted to deploy a tower-based wireless broadband network in the 1545-1555 MHz satellite downlink portion of the L Band, close to GPS frequencies. GPS users objected, and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) which administers federal spectrum, decided GPS interference concerns could not be overcome, whereupon the FCC pulled LightSquared’s tentative authorization. With its recent Petition for Rulemaking (and other documents filed in late September), LightSquared seeks a work-around to its GPS headache (and possibly a Hail Mary to resurrect the company, which is now in bankruptcy). LightSquared’s idea is to pair its existing and as-yet-uncontroversial authorizations for two 10 MHz uplink bands, at 1627.5-1637.5 MHz and 1646.7-1656.7, with a downlink (and terrestrial) channel at 1670-1680 MHz. This band is farther removed from GPS frequencies than LightSquared’s old request. The lower half of the band, at 1670-1675 MHz, is allocated for non-Federal fixed and mobile uses, and has been auctioned; LightSquared, through a subsidiary, has made arrangements to lease this segment. No problem there. But the upper half of LightSquared’s proposed band, at 1675-1680 MHz, is not, at first glance, a good home for a high-powered cellular-type network.

Comments are due on December 10, 2012, and reply comments on Boxing Day, December 26. If the FCC decides to proceed, it will solicit further comments by way of a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

LightSquared Demise Won’t Doom Wireless Plan, Inmarsat Says

Inmarsat, stuck in a stalled project with Philip Falcone’s LightSquared to create a satellite-based, high-speed Internet network in the U.S., aims to pursue the plan even if its partner is liquidated.

LightSquared filed for bankruptcy in May, following a February decision by the Federal Communications Commission to block the service, citing interference with global-positioning devices used in navigating everything from fighter jets to minivans. London-based Inmarsat had contributed U.S. airwave licenses to the project, which would serve as many as 260 million people. Should LightSquared, majority-owned by Falcone’s hedge fund Harbinger Capital Partners, go into liquidation, others may step in as partners to use Inmarsat’s airwaves, Chief Executive Officer Rupert Pearce said. Otherwise, the agreement will terminate, and the largest provider of satellite services to the maritime industry could later decide whether to attempt the project itself, he said.

The great election-night scam

[Commentary] It's a small matter, I know, compared with the historic issues now obsessing the commentariat, such as the fiscal cliff and how many mistresses and admirers David H. Petraeus could keep in the air simultaneously. But before we say goodbye to Campaign 2012, I would just like to point out that the entire drama of a close election, as played out in the media on election night, is basically fake.

Like broadcasters presenting baseball games in the early days of radio, the television networks know who's going to win the game and more or less how it's going to play out, inning by inning. They know this primarily because of research conducted by the National Election Exit Poll on election day. And yet, in a perverse exercise of high-mindedness, the major news organizations have all agreed not to report the results of exit polls until after the polls have closed in a particular state. It's easy to see why the TV networks don't mind putting on a play if the suspense keeps people watching past 6:30 p.m. But it amazes me that, with the encouragement of the government, not to mention an endless string of foundations and commissions and pompous individuals, some of the biggest players in the media world conspire to present a view of the world they know to be false.

New Report Reveals Regional Differences in Illinois Broadband Usage

The digital divide prevails in areas of Southern and Western Illinois where less than 60 percent of residents use high-speed internet services at their home, according to a report on broadband adoption and usage released by Broadband Illinois. Identifying who has high-speed internet, who doesn’t, and how broadband adoption can be expanded to more Illinois homes are key themes of the research, which was gathered via a phone survey in the first quarter of 2012. The report is unique in that it provides a regional breakdown of broadband adoption and usage patterns and cites reasons why some Illinois households choose not to have broadband at home.

Other key findings of the report:

68% of Illinois adults surveyed have broadband at home; 56% of African Americans and 56% of Hispanics have broadband at home.
There is significant regional variation in home broadband adoption rates. For example, in four eTeam regions- Northwest, Southeast Central, Southern, and West Central- home broadband rates fall below 60%.
The 32% of Illinois adults without broadband at home are older, more rural, and have lower incomes than broadband users in the state. Cost, relevance, and digital literacy are cited as key reasons people do not have broadband.

[Editor's note: Benton Foundation Chairman Charles Benton serves on the Board of Directors of Broadband Illinois.]

In UK, Twitter, Facebook rants land some in jail

Figures obtained by The Associated Press through a freedom of information request show a steadily rising tally of prosecutions in Britain for electronic communications — phone calls, emails and social media posts — that are "grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character — from 1,263 in 2009 to 1,843 in 2011. The number of convictions grew from 873 in 2009 to 1,286 last year. Behind the figures are people — mostly young, many teenagers — who find that a glib online remark can have life-altering consequences. Lawyers say the mounting tally shows the problems of a legal system trying to regulate 21st century communications with 20th century laws. Civil libertarians say it is a threat to free speech in an age when the Internet gives everyone the power to be heard around the world.

Is There Now “Blood in the Water” for Google Versus FTC?

It’s hard to find people in Silicon Valley talking about Google’s imminent antitrust battle with the United States Federal Trade Commission. It’s much less difficult in Washington.

In fact, as one D.C. person familiar with the ongoing FTC probe aimed at slapping Google for its worrisome dominance of search and other markets put it most colorfully: “There’s now blood in the water. All these people who have wanted to kill Google, this is their chance. They will never have a better opportunity than the next 30 days.” And that’s why I’m in the nation’s capital for the next few days, sussing out the current status of the impending potential battle between Google and regulators.

Outside group spending controlled the 2012 election conversation

[Commentary] The airwaves and the newspapers have been peppered with reports belittling the impact of outside groups on the 2012 election. Many have taken it a step further and concluded that super-PACs and “dark money” groups — the groups that don’t disclose their donors — are not the threat to our democracy that many had feared. That is where they are wrong.

The tiny cadre of wealthy Americans who were campaign bundlers, as well as the donors who gave to super-PACs and dark money groups, will be the winners — regardless of whom they gave to. How can that be? If their candidate lost, wouldn’t a good businessman question whether he got a good “return on investment”? While favorable electoral outcomes might not have been successfully purchased in many instances, you can be very sure that what was successfully purchased was access and influence.

Regardless of whether their party won or lost, these donors can now convert their large contributions into a ticket to be cashed in for access to and influence with elected officials and their staffs. Having demonstrated their willingness to give large amounts, elite donors seeking audiences with powerful politicians will be rewarded. Savvy politicians will recognize the people they need to keep happy. So, they will continue to court these big-money donors. The new reality in Washington will see the ultra-well-heeled getting even more preferential treatment than in the past. But where does that leave the rest of us?

Benton

Search