1. Monthly archive
  2. June 2017

June 2017

Rep Pallone Wants Investigation of Bogus Net Neutrality Comments

The Federal Communications Commission's network neutrality docket continues to draw a crowd of critics. The latest is House Commerce Committee Ranking Member Frank Pallone (D-NJ). Rep Pallone has called on the Department of Justice and the FBI to investigate whether any federal law has been broken in the filing of fake comments using stolen identities, as some have claimed.

Rep Pallone said he was also worried that some "unknown parties" may be trying to influence federal policy. hat came in a letter to attorney general Jeff Sessions and acting FBI director Andrew McCabe. Rep Pallone wants them to investigate net neutrality activist group Fight for the Future's assertion that at least 14 people had told the FCC that their identities had been used to file comments without their permission, as well as that some 450,000 identical comments were submitted by an "unknown party" that may have been using info gained via data breaches. "Federal law prohibits knowingly making any materially false statement or representation in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch," Rep Pallone's office said.

News Reports Prompt Senate Request for FISA Court Info

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Crime and Terrorism Subcommittee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC) have asked for all the surveillance warrants the FBI asked for from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (FISA) Court as part of the FBI's investigation into Russian campaign interference, including possible collusion with the campaign of Donald Trump.

The top Republicans cited stories by both the BBC and CNN, the latter of which President Trump continues to brand as fake news. The request by the senators was based on news reports that the Justice Department had asked the court for authority to monitor members of the Trump presidential campaign—which the court denied, advising the FBI to narrow its focus. They said they want copies of both classified and non-classified.

Why Comcast and Verizon are suddenly clamoring to be regulated

Some of the nation's biggest Internet service providers are begging a court not to weaken the power of a major regulatory agency — the Federal Trade Commission — in a case that has implications for businesses and consumers nationwide and puts the companies at odds with another key industry player, AT&T.

The request earlier this week by Charter, Comcast, Cox and Verizon seeks to shore up the FTC's ability to regulate Internet providers, in a case about whether the FTC can punish AT&T for allegedly misleading consumers with its marketing of "unlimited" data plans. But the case also has other implications. It could create an undesirable regulatory environment for the companies, they say. "At first glance, [our] position might seem surprising — four leading corporations are arguing in favor of restoring the FTC’s authority to regulate," the ISPs wrote. They added: "If the FTC is divested of jurisdiction," the companies wrote, "it is likely that a variety of federal, state, and local government agencies that lack the appropriate reach, perspective, and experience … will attempt to fill the perceived 'regulatory gaps,' thereby creating a patchwork of unreasonable, duplicative, and inconsistent rules."

US Tech Firms Feel the Heat in Europe

The European Union’s antitrust watchdog has handed down a string of big decisions in recent years against top US technology firms, in what might look to US companies and officials like a trend by Brussels to train investigations on large American companies.

EU officials deny any bias. “We don’t go against Google because it’s an American company but because it’s a company abusing its dominant position in our market.… If it were in Brazil, we wouldn’t care,” a senior EU official said, referring to the EU’s €2.42 billion ($2.71 billion) fine June 27 against Google for unfairly favoring its shopping ads in its search results. EU competition officials are, to a large extent, constrained by antitrust rules and legal precedents when making decisions against any companies, be they American, European or otherwise. But unlike Washington, where U.S. enforcers need to prove their cases before a judge, the EU’s competition directorate acts as prosecutor, judge and jury in competition cases—and only needs to convince itself. Experts say American tech companies are currently getting increased scrutiny because they happen to dominate the industry. This comes at a time when one of the top priorities for the European Commission, the bloc’s executive body, is to ensure the EU’s common market functions more efficiently online and across borders.

Google grows up

Google suddenly grew up at midday June 27 — and the way it conducts business in Europe and probably further afield will have to catch up fast.

Likely more important in the immediate future for Google, which rejects the findings and says it may appeal, the decision will serve as a model for regulators across the globe closely scrutinizing Google, from Seoul to Brasilia, and it will bolster those in the U.S. trying to prod domestic regulators into action. “As matters now stand, the Commission is the primary regulator of internet services in the Western world,” said David Cantor, a Brussels-based technology lawyer. In addition, the decision hurts Google’s otherwise stellar brand and reputation. Its “search franchise is built upon the notion that it is an honest broker of the world’s information,” said Scott Cleland, a founder of consultancy Precursor, an adviser to Google rivals and a trenchant critic of Google. That damage can work in significant and long-lasting ways. For example, Microsoft’s aggressive tactics and antitrust problems made it less attractive to some of the best engineers and university talent, who opted to join nicer companies — like Google.

For Google, Everything Is a Popularity Contest

When I saw that Google had introduced a “Classic Papers” section of Google Scholar, its search tool for academic journals, I couldn’t help but stroke my chin professorially. What would make a paper a classic, especially for the search giant? In a blog post introducing the feature, Google software engineer Sean Henderson explains the company’s rationale. While some articles gain temporary attention for a new and surprising finding or discovery, others “have stood the test of time,” as Henderson puts it. How to measure that longevity? Classic Papers selects papers published in 2006, in a wide range of disciplines, which had earned the most citations as of this year. To become a classic, according to Google, is just to have been the most popular over the decade during which Google itself rose to prominence. It might seem like an unimportant, pedantic gripe to people outside of academia. But Scholar’s classic papers offers a window into how Google conceives of knowledge—and the effect that theory has on the ideas people find with its services.

Michigan may consider Rivada's bid alongside FirstNet

Rivada Networks said it received the top score among three bidders to build Michigan’s statewide public safety broadband network. But that doesn’t at all mean it will beat out FirstNet for its first statewide win.

Michigan’s Department of Technology, Management and Budget recommended that the state analyze Rivada’s bid alongside FirstNet’s proposal “to determine the best value bid for the state,” the company said this morning in a release. Michigan is the second state to select a vendor for a potential alternative to FirstNet, Rivada said, following the lead of New Hampshire, which is also considering Rivada’s offering. “We are honored that our alternative plan for public safety broadband in Michigan will have the chance to be placed side-by-side with the federal government’s offering,” said Declan Ganley, Rivada’s co-CEO, in the announcement. “By putting out this RFP (request for proposal), Michigan has given its governor a real choice, as envisioned in the legislation that created FirstNet.”

T-Mobile could join a Sprint tie-up with Comcast and Charter

Reports of a potential wireless partnership between Sprint, Charter and Comcast have quieted speculation about a merger between Sprint and T-Mobile. But analysts say T-Mobile could play a role in any such arrangement.

Sprint Chairman Masayoshi Son struck a exclusive two-month deal to hold discussions with Charter and Comcast through July focusing on potential partnership arrangements. One such deal could include the cable companies taking an equity stake in Sprint and investing in the carrier’s network, through which they could presumably launch a branded service. But T-Mobile could join such an effort, Jonathan Chaplin of New Street Research wrote in a note to investors. A model that complex would be difficult to pull off, but it could benefit all stakeholders. “Actually, the best-case scenario (for T-Mobile) would be a four-way deal; however that seems tough to get across the goal line,” Chaplin wrote. “The worst-case scenario would see a Sprint/cable deal that leaves T-Mobile out in the cold entirely; we don’t think this is the most likely outcome either. And then there are a host of scenarios in between, where T-Mobile would benefit, potentially greatly, but without the negotiating leverage that many have assumed.”

FCC Chairman Pai Announces Appointment of New BDAC Member

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai appointed Andy Huckaba to serve on the Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee (BDAC). Huckaba will serve on the BDAC as a representative of the City of Lenexa, Kansas, where he is a member of the City Council. Huckaba also serves as Vice-Chair of the FCC’s Intergovernmental Advisory Committee.

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