Author Archives: John S. Quarterman

Net Neutrality as Status Quo

An article suggesting that Skype’s wireless net neutrality proposal to the FCC would involve a lot of work on the part of the FCC, the carriers, and application vendors such as Skype, there’s this tidbit:
The version of net neutrality the Internet companies are pushing, by contrast, only requires maintaining the status quo by prohibiting broadband providers from changing the way they currently price their services.

— Skype’s Wireless FCC Petition An Uphill Battle, Winning a more open cellular infrastructure will prove a daunting challenge. Robert Poe, VoIPNews, March 2nd, 2007

This is a point that is often omitted from stories about net neutrality. Opponents of net neutrality often try to make out that net neutrality is some innovation that is being imposed on them. History shows quite the opposite: the big telcos and cablecos lobbied the FCC to get rid of net neutrality. Until August 2005, when the FCC changed its rules, we had net neutrality. The only reason we need legislation now to put it back is because of that event. Fortunately, the public is becoming wise to the need for net neutrality. Continue reading →

F2C Followup

I’ve posted a few items about the recent Freedom to Connect conference: OK, that last one wasn’t about a talk or panel, but it was pointed out to me by the participant sitting to my left.

Meanwhile, the conference organizer, David S. Isenberg, is collecting links to everybody’s conference blog posts.

I think it was well worth while.

-jsq

FCC, Time-Warner, and Rural VoIP

Here’s an interesting FCC ruling:
The U.S. Federal Communications Commission has ruled that incumbent local exchange carriers must connect to VOIP (voice over Internet Protocol) services, overruling two state public service commission opinions.

…

The rural carriers had argued that FCC rules don’t require them to connect to the wholesale vendors because they don’t provide direct voice service to residents.

But the FCC said that argument was a misinterpretation of its rules.

— FCC: Local telephone carriers must connect to VOIP, Local carriers must allow Internet telephony service by rivals, contrary to state rulings. Grant Gross, PC World, Sunday, March 4, 2007; 11:10 PM

That seems to be a big victory for VoIP, driven, interestingly enough, by a request from Time-Warner. Continue reading →

Collaboration for Innovation

Here’s a pithy summary of one aspect of net neutrality:
It’s been asserted here that companies who enable collaboration, both within and outside their enterprises, have a better chance of creating important innovations in the 21st century. The most common platform for that collaboration to take place over is the internet. As such, maintaining net neutrality – the ability for everyone to access all web entities fairly and promptly without prejudice by telecom providers – is essential in that endeavor.

Finally a politician who (hopefully) understands net neutrality, by C.G. Lynch, The Collaboratory, Thursday, March 01, 2007

Open communications for open participation. It’s almost like in the old days when Disney drew from previous animation attempts and hundreds of years of folklore, legends, and tales.

-jsq

700Mhz for Public Safety and Wireless Broadband

At Freedom to Connect, Reed Hundt mentioned that his current company, FrontLine Wireless, was making a proposal to the FCC; it was released yesterday:
The plan would enable the FCC to simultaneously advance public safety goals and speed broadband wireless access for all Americans — especially those living in rural areas — all goals to which the FCC has demonstrated a steadfast commitment.
The idea is to license some 700Mhz commercial spectrum for a commercial wireless network, provided that the licensee simultaneously support public safety communications. Continue reading →

Wireless Carterfone

Landline broadband isn’t the only arena in which net neutrality is needed.
A paper published by Columbia University Law School Professor Tim Wu claims that wireless networks don’t play by the same rules that wired networks do and limit consumer choice. Skype, for one, agreed with him and petitioned the FCC to mandate that wireless network operators open their networks to more devices and applications. The CTIA fired back.

Wu stated that the FCC’s Carterfone rules “continue to affect innovation and the development of new devices and applications for wireless networks.” His comments elicited a large response from the industry and refocused the net neutrality discussion, this time on the wireless networks.

Wu went on to argue that the carriers exert too much control over the design of mobile equipment and said, “They have used that power to force equipment developers to omit or cripple many consumer-friendly features.”

Paper Sparks Wireless Net Neutrality Debate, By Eric M. Zeman, WirelessWeek, February 28, 2007, NEWS@2 DIRECT

Skype then filed with the FCC to open wireless networks to non-carrier equipment. Continue reading →

EduCause Talking Points

EDUCAUSE, the higher education information technology organization, is active in net neutrality. Why? The first two points of their Talking Points on Net Neutrality answer that:
  1. Net neutrality is fundamentally important to allowing universities fulfill their educational mission. Universities’ goal is to deliver high-quality multimedia instructional material to as many students as possible, including off-campus students and those in rural areas. The widespread availability of open, affordable broadband communications makes distance learning more accessible and effective.
  2. Universities’ Internet research laboratories could be undermined if the Internet is not open to innovation and experimentation. Universities are developing next-generation Internet technologies that will drive the Internet economy. If Internet service providers are allowed to inhibit or degrade these research activities, the United States could lose its leadership role in the creation of Internet-based technologies.
Universities need net neutrality to do their two most basic jobs: teaching and research. Continue reading →

Public Outcry for Net Neutrality

A recent poll says the U.S. public supports net neutrality:
The nationally representative survey found that more than 75 percent of Internet users polled are seriously concerned about not being able to freely choose an Internet service provider or being required to pay twice for certain Internet services. Another 70 percent were concerned about providers blocking or impairing their access to Internet services or sites, such as Internet telephone service or online retailers like Amazon.com. Fifty-four percent want Congress to take action to ensure that Internet providers are prohibited from engaging in these practices.

Importance of the Internet Public Support for Net Neutrality New Survey: Consumers Want Congress to Protect Right to Access Information, Services on Internet, “Network Neutrality” Issue Needs Pro-Active Response from FCC, Congress to Ensure Consumers, Start-Ups Are Not Subject to Discrimination, FCC Commissioner Copps Calls for National Dialogue, ConsumersUnion.org, Wednesday, Jan. 18, 2006

This poll was of 1,000 households in November 2005. Continue reading →

Net Neutrality and Innovation

A newspaper article claims that net neutrality is unnecessary and counterproductive:
On the present Internet, ISPs do have control over what information can pass through their infrastructure, but cases of actual unfair discrimination against certain services are extremely rare. Currently, both the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Communications Commission have authority to enforce competition rules and punish Internet providers for discriminating against unaffiliated services.

Markets, not mandates, for Net, By Dominik Saran, Washington Times, February 28, 2007

Well, yes, the FCC could do that, but in August 2005 it chose to get rid of what remained of net neutrality and to replace it with four vague principles that are not enforced. Continue reading →