Benton RSS Feed
If the 1,500 delegates huddled into a Dubai conference center to thrash out a new global telecommunications treaty didn't know how it felt to be on a reality TV show, they do now.
The high-level diplomats and regulators from 150 countries have been criticized, mocked and - just occasionally - lauded by an online commentariat following proceedings at the U.N.'s World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT). Predictably, many of the bloggers and tweeters have taken aim at those seeking to tame the online world, as a battle rages between the United States and its allies, which want no mention of the Internet in regulations, and a Russia-led block which is calling for a more active role for governments. But there's also criticism of the way the United Nations goes about its business, with a Wikileaks-inspired website -dubbed WCITleaks - spawned to shine a light on what it considers the conference's opaqueness.
Internet turns U.N. telecoms talks into reality show
[Commentary] Bottom line: For $30 a month, we must be able to provide high-speed internet access to every American.
This fiber connection service should include voice, data, and basic broadcast channels at speeds that meet global standards. It’s embarrassing that one of the most innovative nations in the world can’t do this. And if private providers don’t want to do it, local and federal government needs to undertake this infrastructure investment. We need to build fiber rings around every U.S. town and city. Yet we’re moving in the opposite direction. Both Verizon and AT&T have refused to take subsidies from the Federal Communications Commission aimed at ensuring rural service. The reason? They’re worried about regulatory oversight that might follow from taking the money, and they’d rather focus on wireless. More troubling, though, is the perspective – espoused by the giant telecommunications companies – that it’s “our wires, our rules”.
It’s Time to Fix the Pitifully Slow, Expensive Internet Access in the US
Seattle has teamed up with Gigabit Squared, a startup that wants to invest $200 million in building gigabit broadband networks in six college towns around the country, to build a gigabit network.
Seattle, which has its own city-owned dark fiber network, and Gigabit Squared have signed a Memorandum of Understanding and a Letter of Intent that will allow Gigabit Squared to begin raising the capital needed to conduct engineering work and to build out the demonstration fiber network. There are three parts to the network, a fiber-to-home element that will reach 50,000 homes in 12 Seattle neighborhoods. The network will also take advantage of point-to-point wireless, which companies such as WebPass are using, as well as offer some kind of mobile broadband service as well.
This will be Gigabit Squared’s second fiber commitment under an arrangement it has with the Gig.U project headed by Blair Levin. Levin, who led the efforts to write the National Broadband Plan, formed Gig.U to make sure the U.S. maintains a competitive edge in broadband infrastructure. His idea is to build gigabit networks in U.S. college towns so students and researchers can keep up with the broadband speeds that other countries are developing. Gigabit Squared’s first commitment was in Chicago, which it announced in October.
"Leadership in the 21st century global information economy requires leadership in broadband networks, which is why Congress provided $4 billion to NTIA to invest in broadband projects nationwide," said Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information and NTIA Administrator Lawrence E. Strickling. "Seattle’s announcement today will give it a strategic bandwidth advantage, and we look forward to watching the city leverage its innovation-ripe environment for economic growth."
Seattle is latest city to go around ISPs to get a gigabit network Statement (NTIA Administrator Strickling)
Minority-owned media remains “excruciatingly low,” and lifting a ban on companies owning newspapers and television stations in the same market would only make matters worse, civil-rights groups and political leaders argue. On Dec 10, several prominent minority members of the House were among 44 signatories on a letter urging a full study of the impact that lifting the ban might have on minority media ownership.
Among the signers:
- Civil-rights icon Rep. John Lewis (D-GA).
- Congressional Black Caucus Chairman Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO).
- Congressional Hispanic Caucus Chairman Rep. Charles Gonzalez (D-TX).
- Cochairmen of the Congressional Progressive Caucus Reps. Keith Ellison (D-MN) and Raul Grijalva (D-AZ).
“While local broadcast media remain an important source of information for our constituents, these outlets often do not reflect the diversity of the communities they serve,” the letter said. “Women and people of color historically held very few licenses for radio and television stations, and these numbers remain shockingly low.”
Coalition Says Lifting Ban on Media Consolidation Hits Hard on Minority Ownership
In a world with hundreds of cable channels and thousands of websites, it must sound as quaint as talk about VHS players and Walkmans to worry about how many media outlets any one company gets to own. But even in a media landscape with countless options, the nation's biggest media companies also control our biggest TV stations, radio outlets and online destinations, wielding an influence that can be magnified far beyond the actual platforms they own.
In the Tampa Bay market, just three companies — Clear Channel, CBS Radio and Cox Radio — own 20 radio stations, including the top 16 outlets reaching more than 80 percent of people listening in November's ratings period. And some of media's biggest websites, from the Huffington Post to the Drudge Report, are built around "aggregating" stories already reported by other news outlets, allowing the New York Times or Wall Street Journal to echo across a wider swath of the Internet than you might imagine.
Why it still matters that FCC may loosen media ownership rules
The Senate Judiciary Committee voted in favor of Sen. Al Franken's (D-MN) Location Privacy Protection Act.
The bill would require companies to get a customer's consent before collecting or sharing mobile location data. It would also ban mobile applications that secretly monitor the user's location — a feature that Sen Franken said allows for stalking and enables domestic violence. Sen Franken noted that many apps already ask for users' permission before tracking them, but he said his bill is necessary to ensure that the practice is mandatory. Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT), Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and Tom Coburn (R-OK) did not attend the markup, but registered dissenting votes. Sen Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the panel's ranking Republican, said he still has concerns with the bill, but he agreed to move it forward. Sens. Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) also said they have some concerns with the language of the bill, but they said they would work with Sen Franken to improve the legislation. Sen Franken said he already worked on his bill for a year and a half, and added that he held extensive conversations with industry groups. But he said he would work with the other senators to address their concerns.
Senate Judiciary Committee approves Franken's location privacy bill
A jury found that Apple's iPhone infringed three patents owned by holding company MobileMedia Ideas, though damages have not yet been determined. The verdict was delivered after a week-long trial in Delaware federal court, said Larry Horn, chief executive of MobileMedia. The three patents, which cover features like camera phone technology, were acquired from Nokia and Sony Corp in 2010, Horn said. Those two companies hold a minority interest in MobileMedia, he said. The trial only concerned liability, and a damages proceeding has not yet been scheduled, Horn said.
Jury says Apple iPhone violated three patents, damages unclear
Apple and LG Electronics didn’t infringe an Alcatel-Lucent unit’s patents for electronic devices including phones and computers, a jury said. The verdict came after a trial that began Nov. 27 in federal court in San Diego over a 2010 lawsuit by the Paris- based company’s Multimedia Patent Trust accusing Apple and LG Electronics of copying video-compression technology that allows data to be sent more efficiently over communications media, including the Internet and satellites, or stored on DVDs and Blu-Ray disks. The trust claimed its patents were infringed by products including multiple versions of Apple’s iPhone, iPod, iPad and MacBook, as well as LG Electronics’ Chocolate Touch VX8575, Bliss UX700, Touch AX8575, Lotus Elite LX610, Mystique UN610 and Samba LG8575.
Apple, LG Electronics Defeat Alcatel-Lucent Patent Claims
T-Mobile officially activated its overhauled HSPA+ systems in five more regions of the country, including the greater Chicago area, bringing it that much closer to fielding a nationwide network that can fully support Apple’s iPhone.
The launch in Chicago; Reno; Fresno and Sacramento; and the region surrounding Los Angeles (though not in LA itself) – coupled with activations on earlier in Atlanta, Seattle and Minneapolis – bring its total upgraded footprint to 23 markets covering more than 100 million people. While T-Mobile doesn’t sell the device yet, customers with unlocked iPhones can use them on the carrier’s network. But only in areas where the upgrade is complete will they get anything beyond a 2G connection.
T-Mobile completes iPhone-friendly Upgrade in 23 cities
If the court throws out net neutrality regulations, House Democrats might counter with new legislation, Rep. Mike Doyle (D-PA) said. “I know that Anna Eshoo in our committee has expressed some interest in maybe developing legislation” Rep Doyle said at a POLITICO Pro’s P2012 Policy and Politics Technology Luncheon. But he hopes that the rules survive a legal challenge by Verizon. A ruling on the case is expected sometime in 2013.
Democrats watching court on network neutrality rules