July 2015

[Commentary] Congressional hearings will take up the need for more wireless spectrum—the invisible radio frequencies that transmit information to and from mobile devices. Auctioning government spectrum to fulfill this need would not only provide significant revenue for the Treasury; it would also greatly benefit data-hungry American consumers. And because these auctions take years to prepare and implement, now is the time to begin the work.

Concepts in the Senate’s Wireless Innovation Act or the Wi-Fi Innovation Act in the House are a constructive place to begin. Congress can create financial incentives—such as allowing government agencies to share in auction proceeds—to encourage agencies like the Pentagon or the Transportation Department to relinquish spectrum that they aren’t efficiently using. But if the agencies balk, Congress should make them give it up. Congress should also consider spectrum sharing. The FCC proposed an idea, endorsed last year by the White House panel of science and technology advisers, to use database technology that would enable the sharing of radio frequencies among commercial broadband, military and other government systems. Spectrum sharing would benefit the armed services, helping to reduce the growing gap between communications technologies available to consumers and those available to our troops. It might also reduce Pentagon equipment costs. Unlicensed spectrum, for which government permission isn’t required for consumers to use, is another opportunity.

If we fail to adopt a plan to transfer federal spectrum to private users, policy makers may inadvertently undermine US competitiveness and job creation. Keeping discussions bipartisan and focused on solving problems through investment, innovation, job growth and new revenue for the Treasury will best ensure that new technologies pioneered in the US are first enjoyed by US consumers.

[Genachowski is a managing director at the Carlyle Group and former chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. McDowell, a former FCC commissioner, is a partner at Wiley Rein LLP and a senior adviser to Berenson]

The top trade negotiators of the United States and 11 other Pacific nations are gathering at a luxury resort in Maui for one last push to complete the largest regional trade accord in history, roping together 40 percent of the world’s economic output. But even though it is billed as the “final round” of Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations, trade representatives from the United States, Japan and Pacific nations from Canada and Chile to Australia and Vietnam have high hurdles to clear.

Given the challenges, the prospect of concluding a deal by July 31 — the goal of the Maui conference — is far from certain. Yet despite all the posturing and bluster, United States and Asian officials involved in the talks say they are confident. One Asian negotiator likened the final round to a chess match where all the final moves are mapped out but the players are waiting to take their turns.

AT&T has come out swinging at the Federal Communications Commission over the agency's proposed $100 million fine for allegedly violating the transparency rule in the FCC's 2010 network neutrality order, calling it "unprecedented and indefensible" -- and in part unconstitutional -- and saying a court will throw it out if it is imposed.

AT&T wants the FCC to withdraw the proposed fine. The FCC proposed the fine in June 2015, and this is AT&T's chance to respond before the FCC decides whether to rule the apparent liability an actual one. Signaling that slowing broadband speeds is not an acceptable business model, the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau on June 17 proposed fining AT&T Mobile $100 million over its maximum bit rate approach to what AT&T says is a small minority of unlimited plan users whose heavy use could impair others’ online experience. Swallowing that fine was not one of the conditions on the AT&T-DirecTV deal, which was obvious from AT&T's response Monday (July 27) to the FCC notice of apparent liability (NAL). It called the FCC decision arbitrary, excessive and beyond its statutory authority.

Google said its AdSense advertising service for websites will require online publishers that get visitors from the European Union to specifically ask for consent to use their data, amid heavy regulatory scrutiny in the region.

The company is making the changes after requests from authorities in the EU. The consent policy covers topics such as data collection, sharing and usage -- along with the storing and accessing of cookies, tools that help track consumers’ activity online. Google is asking websites that use its ad tools to get explicit user permission as it faces stepped-up regulatory attention in Europe. The new consent policy will cover related products DoubleClick Ad Exchange and DoubleClick for Publishers, tools for managing ads on websites.