1. Monthly archive
  2. August 2016

August 2016

American Cable Association Skewers Connect America Fund Proposals for Lacking Data, Avoiding Statutory Requirements

The first round of comments in the Federal Communications Commission's Connect America Fund (CAF) rulemaking have "strayed from the statute's 'reasonable comparability' requirement," according to the American Cable Association's reply comments on the competitive bidding program. The responses of the major telecommunication providers "not only ... downplay the statute, but [also discourage] many parties from participating in the auction, thereby limiting the cost-effective distribution of support," the ACA said.

The FCC's final weighting of CAF Phase II bids must be based on the original statute and "an evolving level or service," ACA contended in its reply to the proposed rulemaking, which encompasses Rural Broadband Experiments. Many of the companies responding to the FCC "tended to emphasize the need to maximize the number of locations served within the budget," according to a statement from ACA president/CEO Matthew Polka. "The FCC should weight bids based on the statutory requirement that consumers in eligible areas receive reasonably comparable service to urban consumer preferences for broadband Internet access services over the 10-year timeframe of the program and that, to maximize participation, the deployment cost of bids in different performance tiers be normalized. Both of these factors can be determined using a methodology based on market data and are quantifiable," Polka said. The ACA filing urged the FCC to reject the weighting system proposed by earlier commenters.

A new flaw puts nearly a billion phones at risk and shows Android security is still a patchwork mess

Another big security flaw in Android highlights just how messed up the Google ecosystem still is when it comes to security. This one, known as Quadrooter, was disclosed in recent days by security software maker Check Point. Quadrooter affects a whole host of top-end Android devices running one of Qualcomm’s Snapdragon chips. That means hundreds of millions or even a billion devices could be at risk, including top-end models such as the Samsung Galaxy S7, HTC 10 and LG G5 and even Google’s latest Nexus devices and security-focused devices like BlackBerry’s Priv and Silent Circle’s Blackphone.

The problem is there are still so many hands in the pot when it comes to updating Android. Google updates its software, but device makers have to tailor it for their phones — and sometimes they get their software not from Google, but from chipmakers like Qualcomm. And then sometimes mobile carriers want to do their own testing to make sure they aren’t inadvertently introducing other problems onto their network. All that means the time from when a flaw is identified or disclosed to when it is fixed is longer than it should be, sometimes leaving hundreds of millions of phones vulnerable for weeks or months.

A Tour of Kansas City’s Digital Divide

The National Digital Inclusion Alliance’s first Net Inclusion Summit in Kansas City, Missouri, brought together activists from around the country who are working towards the same goal: for everyone, from all walks of life, to have access to the Internet. As a student of Florida International University (FIU), I had the opportunity to attend the Net Inclusion Summit, along with my classmate, Romina Angelelli, and our professor, Dr. Moses Shumow. During my time at the summit, I attended some incredibly informative lectures by excellent speakers. But it was the tour around Kansas City to different organizations addressing the digital divide that moved me beyond measure. The tour went to three locations that have successfully built networks to provide Internet access in underserved communities: Juniper Gardens, Reconciliation Services, and Wayne Miner. To see those community leaders in action, their passion illuminated, and to hear about their experience first-hand was inspiring.

The FCC Needs to Make Broadband Affordable for Schools, Hospitals, and Businesses

[Commentary] The Republican and Democratic party platforms may clash on most issues, but they do agree on one thing: Broadband access is critical. According to the Republican platform, America must “pav[e] the way for high-speed, next generation broadband deployment and competition.” The Democratic platform echoes this view, proclaiming: “High-speed Internet connectivity is not a luxury; it is a necessity for 21st century economic success, social mobility, education, health care, and public safety.” Like electricity, high-speed data connectivity has become vital to the production of virtually everything else in the economy. Businesses, hospitals, office buildings, schools and other institutions require significantly more bandwidth than you use at home—so they need a far fatter pipe that is always available, reliable, and secure. Seems logical, right?

But currently the prices and terms for business broadband are often unreasonable and vary widely based on the number of competing providers. But there’s a chance this could change: Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler has promised to reform the broken market for enterprise-grade connections to the Internet in 2016, and Aug 9, is the deadline for public comments on proposals. Just as the FCC adopted strong network neutrality rules in 2014, reasoning that broadband access is increasingly essential to the rest of the economy, the commission should ensure businesses and other institutions pay a competitive market price for Internet access.

[Michael Calabrese is director of the Wireless Future Project, which is part of New America’s Open Technology Institute.]

Balance, Fairness and a Proudly Provocative Presidential Candidate

[Commentary] If you’re a working journalist and you believe that Donald J. Trump is a demagogue playing to the nation’s worst racist and nationalistic tendencies, that he cozies up to anti-American dictators and that he would be dangerous with control of the United States nuclear codes, how the heck are you supposed to cover him? Because if you believe all of those things, you have to throw out the textbook American journalism has been using for the better part of the past half-century, if not longer, and approach it in a way you’ve never approached anything in your career.

If you view a Trump presidency as something that’s potentially dangerous, then your reporting is going to reflect that. You would move closer than you’ve ever been to being oppositional. That’s uncomfortable and uncharted territory for every mainstream, nonopinion journalist I’ve ever known, and by normal standards, untenable. But the question that everyone is grappling with is: Do normal standards apply? And if they don’t, what should take their place?

FilmOn X, Broadcasters Square Off in Ninth Circuit

TV networks took aim at FilmOn X Aug 4 in oral argument before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, with much of the argument focused on whether the Internet is a communications channel under Congress' definition of a cable system eligible for a compulsory license under the 1976 Copyright Act. The argument was in front of the three-judge panel of Diarmuid O'Scannlain, Consuelo Callahan, and Johnnie Rawlinson. A compulsory license would allow FilmOn X to deliver TV station programming from the major networks at a government-set rate, rather than having to negotiate for it individually. FilmOn X (formerly Aereokiller), which streams video content online, says it is the equivalent of a cable system and should have the same compulsory license.

Fair use groups Public Knowledge and the Electronic Frontier Foundation agree, having filed briefs in support of FilmOn. Fox and the other Big Four TV networks -- with the support of the National Association of Broadcasters and many others -- say it is not entitled to the license. US District Court Judge George Wu sided with FilmOn X, which prompted Fox and the networks to appeal to the Ninth Circuit to overturn that decision. In oral argument, the TV networks' lawyer, Neal Katyal of Hogan Lovells, said the fact that FilmOn X "now claims" that it is a cable system "contradicts the text of the Copyright Act, contradicts its purpose and contradicts what every judge looking at this found," except judge Wu.

© 1994-2026 Benton Institute for Broadband & Society. All Rights Reserved.