November 2014

US CTO on network neutrality critics: ‘Are you supposed to argue with physics?’

A Q&A with Megan Smith, the country's newly-appointed chief technology officer, and Alex Macgillivray, deputy US CTO. It wasn't long ago that they were Silicon Valley stars known for pushing boundaries. Now they're working side-by-side in an Eisenhower Executive Office Building bullpen next to the White House tasked with equipping President Obama and his team with a deep understanding of how technology works.

Smith says, “It's an incredibly important thing to make sure we preserve net neutrality. Candidate Obama before he was president spent the time to understand that because of its huge impact on our economy, and to understand from these innovators what was important. He became early on a huge supporter of net neutrality, and he understood it. Now, I think, he can see, the [Federal Communications Commission] is an independent agency, but they're about to weigh in, and there's been a huge groundswell of input from the public. As it got close, I think the president felt that it was pretty important as they were about to deliberate to weigh in.” Macgillivray adds, “The coverage of it has been a little bit weird, in that every time President Obama has said the same thing. His position has been that it is very important, the whole way through. But every time, there's surprise, which is a little weird.”

Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker voices support for net neutrality principles

Before a room full of start-up entrepreneurs in Washington (DC), Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker was asked about her department's role in the ongoing debate over network neutrality, or the idea that all online content should be treated the same by Internet service providers.

In response, Secretary Pritzker focused on her support for the ambitions of that proposal rather than on the controversial mechanics of President Obama's approach. "I think that what was really important were the principles that the president put out," said the secretary. "As you know, the president has supported net neutrality since he was a candidate in 2008. And really what we're focused on, and what has been our role, we have had a seat at the table in terms of making sure that these principles were well-articulated, which is really no blocking, no throttling, no paid prioritization, and increased transparency throughout the connectivity that goes into the effectiveness of the Internet."

Obama punts on network neutrality

[Commentary] President Obama's decision to advocate the reclassification of Internet broadband services as a utility under Title II of the Telecommunications Act -- that is, making broadband subject to all the laws that regulate telephone service -- seems particularly Obama-like: squirrelly and lofty at the same time.

It's squirrelly because it will never happen. Even the FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler seemed to acknowledge the president's unhelpfulness by coolly noting the difficult legal thresholds further regulation and a change in status might face. Calling for a policy that everyone involved in the issue knows will never be enacted is a lot like having no policy. It is, in effect, washing your hands of the matter. Still, you are positioning yourself on the beautiful high road, and leaving everybody else down on the dirty low one.

AT&T Stops Using Undeletable Phone Tracking IDs

AT&T says it has stopped its controversial practice of adding a hidden, undeletable tracking number to its mobile customers' Internet activity. "It has been phased off our network," said Emily J. Edmonds, an AT&T spokeswoman. The move comes after AT&T and Verizon received a slew of critical news coverage for inserting tracking numbers into their subscribers' Internet activity, even after users opted out. Edmonds said AT&T may still launch a program to sell data collected by its tracking number, but that if and when it does, "customers will be able to opt out of the ad program and not have the numeric code inserted on their device."

TRUSTe Settles FTC Charges it Deceived Consumers Through Its Privacy Seal Program

TRUSTe, a major provider of privacy certifications for online businesses, has agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that it deceived consumers about its recertification program for company’s privacy practices, as well as perpetuated its misrepresentation as a non-profit entity.

TRUSTe provides seals to businesses that meet specific requirements for consumer privacy programs that it administers. TRUSTe seals assure consumers that businesses’ privacy practices are in compliance with specific privacy standards like the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) and the US-EU Safe Harbor Framework. The FTC’s complaint alleges that from 2006 until January 2013, TRUSTe failed to conduct annual recertifications of companies holding TRUSTe privacy seals in over 1,000 incidences, despite providing information on its website that companies holding TRUSTe Certified Privacy Seals receive recertification every year. In addition, the FTC’s complaint alleges that since TRUSTe became a for-profit corporation in 2008, the company has failed to require companies using TRUSTe seals to update references to the organization’s non-profit status. Before converting from a non-profit to a for-profit, TRUSTe provided clients model language describing TRUSTe as a non-profit for use in their privacy policies.

The proposed order will help ensure that TRUSTe maintains a high standard of consumer protection going forward. Under the terms of its settlement with the FTC, TRUSTe will be prohibited from making misrepresentations about its certification process or timeline, as well as being barred from misrepresenting its corporate status or whether an entity participates in its program. In addition, TRUSTe must not provide other companies or entities the means to make misrepresentations about these facts, such as through incorrect or inaccurate model language.

Facebook Tries to Explain Its Privacy Settings but Advertising Still Rules

Facebook is explaining how the service works in simpler, clearer language, including a new animated dashboard that attempts to answer common questions like how to delete a post or who can see the comments you make on someone else’s post. But as with previous moves by the company on privacy, there is an unstated business goal: to sell more advertising based on the vast quantities of personal data that the social network has on its 1.35 billion users, both from their activities on Facebook and increasingly, their wanderings on the web and inside other mobile applications.

In pursuit of that goal, every bit of personal information is a valuable data point that the company is eager to exploit, and Facebook plans to ask users in a much broader swath of the world to share details of their interests in order to better target the ads that are shown to them. Jeffrey Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy and a frequent critic of Facebook’s privacy practices, said that the announcements follow the company’s traditional pattern. “They suffer from repeated ‘we will do better privacy while we actually collect more of your data’ syndrome,” he wrote in an email. “Facebook users need to be given actual control over its data-driven marketing system.”

Commissioner O'Rielly: FCC Should Expect Tougher Oversight From GOP

Speaking to the US Chamber of Commerce's Telecom and E-Commerce Committee meeting, Federal Communications Commission member Michael O’Rielly said the "deep deference" he suggested the Democrat-controlled Senate has accorded the Obama Administration is a "thing of the past," which means there will be tougher scrutiny of federal agencies, including the FCC.

"I expect that the new Congress will be very active on communications-related issues. My experiences from the last time Republicans controlled both institutions," he said referring to his time as a former Hill staffer, "suggest that considerable time will be spent by the committees of jurisdiction considering how best to modify current law to reflect modern technology and the competitive marketplace or marketplace realities. Call it a rewrite, an update, or just a modernization effort; everything is on the table right now. And, as many of you may recall, the 1996 Telecom Act was passed by a Republican Congress and signed by a democratic president."

He added: “"I also expect that the new Congress will focus significant time conducting oversight of federal departments and agencies. The deep deference provided to this administration is probably a thing of the past. That means greater review of the Commission's internal workings and scrutiny of its decisions."

FCC Commissioner O'Rielly to Name Robin Colwell as New Chief of Staff and Legal Advisor

Federal Communications Commission member Michael O’Rielly has announced his intention to hire Robin Colwell, currently legal advisor to Sen Tim Scott (R-SC), to be his new chief of staff and legal advisor for media issues. She will also handle all press inquiries. Colwell will start on December 15, 2014, assuming proper hiring procedures and clearances are approved by that date.

Colwell has extensive background in communications policy, having worked most recently as Legislative Counsel to Sen Scott, and Counsel to the Senate Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Tourism, Competitiveness, and Innovation, of which Sen Scott is the Ranking Member. She has served in the past as Counsel to former Sens Jim DeMint (R-SC) and Peter G. Fitzgerald (R-IL), as well as former Rep Connie Mack (R-FL). Before her time on the Hill, Colwell was an associate at Wiley Rein & Fielding, focused on telecommunications and technology transactions.

A Florida native, Colwell first came to Washington as a law clerk to Chief Judge H. Robert Mayer of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. She received her J.D. from the College of William and Mary School of Law and her B.S. from Florida State University.

Google has free speech right in search results, court confirms

A San Francisco court ruled that Google has the right to arrange its search results as it pleases, which confirms the company’s long-held position, while underscoring the stark difference in how US and European authorities seek to regulate the search giant.

The new ruling, which is the first since 2007 to address Google’s rights under the First Amendment, came after a website called CoastNews argued that Google had unfairly pushed it far down in its search results -- even though, CoastNews claimed, its site appeared at the top of results created by Bing and Yahoo. CoastNews suggested the poor rankings were because Google wanted to eliminate CoastNews as a potential competitor.

Amazon and Hachette Resolve Dispute

Hachette won an important victory in its battle with Amazon: the ability to set its own prices for e-books, which it sees as critical to its survival. But even as the publisher and retailer announced a negotiated peace after sparring since January, hardly anyone seemed in the mood for celebratory fireworks.

The conflict, which played out in increasingly contentious forums as the year progressed, left wounds too deep for that. Amazon has been cast as a bully in publications across the ideological spectrum, and a large group of authors is calling for it to be investigated on antitrust grounds. Its sales were hit by the dispute, analysts said. Hachette, too, revealed its vulnerability. Amazon’s supporters publicly questioned the need for Hachette, the fourth largest publisher, to exist in an era when authors can publish themselves digitally, an accusation Hachette was reluctant to respond to.

Benton

Search