February 2015

Title II, a provision in the country's 81-year-old telecommunications law, could be used to tighten regulations on the telecommunications and cable industries. Here's why they're not happy about it.

For starters, there's Section 201, which gives the Federal Communications Commission the right to dictate the prices Internet service providers can charge for their services. The providers fear the FCC may set rates too low to allow them to recoup the costs associated with building out their networks. That, in turn, would deter them from making future investments, they argue. If the FCC gets its way, Internet service will fall under the same centuries-old principle that has been applied to everything from shipping lanes to roller coasters: common carriage. Uncertainty about the FCC's rules has unsettled broadband providers. "The whole market is on tenterhooks wondering what's happening," said Steven Shepard, a Director of Educational Programs at USC's business school. A little bit of clarity will go a long way to settling the industry's nerves, no matter the outcome.

While the Federal Communications Commission is cracking down hard on Wi-Fi blocking and blasting Marriott International's request to do just that, the FCC so far hasn't addressed other questions that Marriott and the American Hotel & Lodging Association put forth in their petition in 2014.

Hotels like the Marriott use network management systems made by various vendors, including Aruba Networks, Cisco and Ruckus Wireless, that allow a hotel to manage its Wi-Fi networks. And even though the petition turned into something of a public relations nightmare, the petitioners and some vendors continue to seek clarity on what network management tools and techniques are allowed. Aruba's equipment, for example, allows a Wi-Fi network operator to identify what types of devices are on its network, where the devices are accessing the network, and the bandwidth they consume. Aruba's platform also uses wireless access points to scan the radio frequency environment for unauthorized devices that are interfering or potentially could interfere with the Wi-Fi operator's network. As to why the FCC is acting on this topic now, some believe the question wasn't posed before the commission until now. No one came to the FCC and said: Will you give us permission to interfere with Wi-Fi operations? Once someone asked that question, the FCC gave its answer.

Apparently, Verizon is close to selling a package of assets including cellphone towers and parts of its wireline business, a group of deals that will bring in more than $10 billion. The deals will involve different buyers and could be announced soon. The deals comes as Verizon is working to pay down debt and cover the $10.4 billion in wireless licenses it won in a government auction.

Reps Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Suzan DelBene (D-WA) and Ted Poe (R-TX) are introducing the Online Communications and Geolocation Protection Act, which would update a nearly three-decade-old law they say has not kept pace with technology, and which would require a warrant to obtain someone's email or location information.

"Fourth Amendment protections don't stop at the Internet, and Americans rightly expect constitutional protections to extend to their online communications and location data," Rep Lofgren said. The proposal would update the 1986 Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), which currently allows law enforcement to access email and other electronic content without a warrant if that information is more than 180 days old. Only a subpoena is currently required.