Benton RSS Feed
[Commentary] Last week’s Congressional oversight hearing on the Lifeline program vacillated between fact and fiction. Thanks to efforts by Springwire and Consumer Action, more than 1,400 Americans who benefit from the program wrote to tell the committee how important Lifeline phone service is to low-income households. Testimony from industry, consumer advocates and government confirmed that providing communications support to low-income households allows these Americans to call employers, schools, health care providers, family, veterans' help lines, and police. The bottom line is that access to communications helps people find their own pathways out of poverty. However, despite a record overflowing with letters of support, individual stories and expert testimony, many members attending the hearing continued to perpetuate negative myths about the program.
Should we provide a ‘Hand Up” to low-income Americans or “Hang Up” on them?
Sprint-Nextel said that it has received a special waiver from SoftBank to talk with Dish Network about its takeover proposal. SoftBank, a Japanese cellphone carrier, agreed to buy Sprint last year. Earlier this month, Dish announced a competing $25.5 billion offer for Sprint. Sprint said that the waiver will allow a special committee of its board to enter into a non-disclosure agreement and to hold discussions "for the purpose of clarifying and obtaining further information from DISH regarding its proposal."
Sprint to talk with Dish about bid
Sprint Nextel has tentatively set June 12 as the date for a shareholder vote on selling a 70% stake to Japan's SoftBank for $20.1 billion.
A Sprint spokesman said the proxy related to the vote hasn't been approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the date may change. Sprint, the No. 3 U.S. wireless carrier, is intertwined in a series of deals that aim to remake the long-struggling company. After striking a deal with SoftBank last fall, Dish Network made a competing $25.5 billion proposal to buy Sprint last week. Sprint's board has formed a special committee to evaluate the Dish offer and it has also requested additional information from Dish. A number of major Sprint shareholders have voiced their endorsement of the Dish offer. Sprint itself is in the process of buying the portion of mobile-broadband company Clearwire that it doesn't already own. Dish had made an offer for Clearwire prior to its proposal for all of Sprint. Dish has said it would be able to sign a definitive agreement to buy Sprint shortly after Sprint grants access to its financial details.
Sprint Sets June 12 as Tentative Date for SoftBank Deal Vote
A government task force is preparing legislation that would pressure companies such as Facebook and Google to enable law enforcement officials to intercept online communications as they occur, according to current and former U.S. officials familiar with the effort.
Driven by Federal Bureau of Investigation concerns that it is unable to tap the Internet communications of terrorists and other criminals, the task force’s proposal would penalize companies that failed to heed wiretap orders — court authorizations for the government to intercept suspects’ communications. Rather than antagonizing companies whose cooperation they need, federal officials typically back off when a company is resistant, industry and former officials said. But law enforcement officials say the cloak drawn on suspects’ online activities — what the FBI calls the “going dark” problem — means that critical evidence can be missed.
Panel seeks to fine tech companies for noncompliance with wiretap orders
Google has bought Wavii, a Seattle startup behind an application that condenses online content for time-pressed Web surfers. Wavii's technology grasps the context of language so it can summarize the main points in news stories and other content. Although Wavii's app is shutting down, CEO Adrian Aoun says the startup's technology will be used in other Google products.
Google Buys Startup that Summarizes Online Content
[Commentary] Last week CISPA, the cybersecurity information-sharing bill, passed the House. Though fundamentally flawed, the bill is very different from when it passed the House a year ago, demonstrating the power of a growing Internet advocacy community that sometimes underestimates its own influence. Two game-changing achievements stand out.
When CISPA was reintroduced this year, CDT and others pointed out that, once again, the bill allowed information shared with the government for cybersecurity purposes to be used for national security purposes unrelated to cybersecurity. In the face of criticism that this loophole would turn CISPA into a backdoor intelligence-gathering operation, the House Intelligence Committee amended the text to clearly prohibit such uses. Chalk up one significant victory for Internet advocacy. A second major flaw in the bill was that it would have changed decades of federal policy by shifting control over private sector cybersecurity programs to a super-secret military agency, the National Security Agency. Last year, in the face of criticism, the House leadership blocked any vote on the question of civilian versus military leadership. This year, in the face of ongoing advocacy about the dangers of giving a military agency the lead role in cybersecurity efforts for private sector networks, an amendment was allowed and passed. The amendment was poorly drafted and may not actually say what its sponsors or advocates intended, but there was no doubt that Members thought they were voting to reaffirm civilian leadership. There is no going back now. That House vote changed the dynamic of the debate. The lead Senate bill last year, and the White House, had already embraced civilian control. Any future cybersecurity bill must give the lead role to a civilian agency. A second significant victory for Internet advocates.
CISPA Changes Show Power of Internet Advocacy (Huffington Post)
Roughly one in four cellphone towers in the path of Hurricane Sandy went out of service. It was a frustrating and potentially dangerous experience for customers without a landline to fall back on. Now, local officials and communications experts are pushing providers to improve their performance during natural disasters.
In the city of Long Beach (NY), all the cell towers went down during Sandy. City Manager Jack Schnirman described the experience at a recent Federal Communications Commission hearing on how cellphone networks held up, or didn't, during the storm. "There was one woman in particular who passed away, of natural causes, an elderly woman," he said. "And her daughter had to walk literally a mile and a half from her home to police headquarters just to say, 'Listen, my mom has passed, and I thought I should tell somebody.' " To prepare for the next disaster, Schnirman wants better access to "Cell on Wheels," or COWs. They're cell towers that can be moved from place to place. He wants backup power, like generators, at cell towers. And he wants better access to the cell providers themselves. He said he didn't even know whom to call during Sandy.
After Sandy, Questions Linger Over Cellphone Reliability
Although iTunes has in many ways been a godsend to fans of digital music, it has been a source of endless frustration for the music industry.
Since the introduction the iTunes Music Store on April 28, 2003, music sales have plummeted in the United States -- from $11.8 billion in 2003 to $7.1 billion last year, according to the Recording Industry Association of America. When adjusted for inflation, revenue has been more than halved since Apple launched the iTunes Music Store. Interestingly, during that same time, people have been buying more music than ever. How is that possible? It's because the iTunes Music Store popularized the cheap digital single.
A decade of iTunes singles killed the music industry
House Science Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) has drafted a bill that, in effect, would replace peer review at the National Science Foundation (NSF) with a set of funding criteria chosen by Congress.
For good measure, it would also set in motion a process to determine whether the same criteria should be adopted by every other federal science agency. The legislation represents the latest—and bluntest—attack on NSF by congressional Republicans seeking to halt what they believe is frivolous and wasteful research being funded in the social sciences. Last month, Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) successfully attached language to a 2013 spending bill that prohibits NSF from funding any political science research for the rest of the fiscal year unless its director certifies that it pertains to economic development or national security. Smith's draft bill, called the "High Quality Research Act," would apply similar language to NSF's entire research portfolio across all the disciplines that it supports.
Lamar Smith Proposes New Criteria for Choosing NSF Grants
In 2012 as a whole, Google received more than twice as many takedown requests as it had in 2011. “It’s become increasingly clear that the scope of government attempts to censor content on Google services has grown,” legal director Susan Infantino wrote. This varies country by country: some only bother the company a few times each year. Others get in touch multiple times each day. Among this latter group of countries, the one that has been the most aggressive about using Google to remove content—and the country who among top requesters, has had its requests shot down most often -- is Brazil. In 2011 and again in 2012, of all the countries in the world, Brazil asked Google to take down Internet content more times than any other country. Plenty of these had to do with defamation, which comprises about two-fifths of overall requests: Google’s social network, Orkut, is particularly popular in Brazil, and many of the 2011 requests related to defamation on Orkut and YouTube. But in 2012, a disproportionate number—235 court orders and three executive requests out of 697 total—related to violations of election law, the third most common reason countries cite for removing online material (second is privacy and security). Brazil’s election law, compared to those in the United States, are restrictive.
Google vs Brazil