Category Archives: Government

Neutral Net Face

An online chili vendor gets political:
Now, Maricle is worried that the big boys might gain an edge on the virtual highway where he set up shop. That explains why he and five other Internet devotees from Albuquerque sat down with Republican Rep. Heather Wilson in late February to urge her to act on “Net neutrality,” legislation that aims to block telephone companies from providing a premium service to Internet customers who pay higher fees.

— The Human Face of Net Neutrality, By: Jeanne Cummings, The Politico, April 9, 2007 05:34 PM EST

Politicians respond to local constituents. Continue reading →

FCC Sees Wireless Broadband Internet as Information Service

The FCC has reclassified wireless broadband Internet access services as information services, just like DSL, BPL, and cable modems:
Today, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) declared that wireless broadband Internet access service is an information service under the Communications Act (Act). This action places wireless broadband Internet access service on the same regulatory footing as other broadband services, such as cable modem service, wireline broadband (DSL) Internet access service, and Broadband over Power Line (BPL)-enabled Internet access service. It thus ensures that wireless broadband Internet access services are similarly free from unnecessary regulatory burdens. Competition among all of these broadband services will provide consumers with more and better services at lower prices.

&mdash: FCC CLASSIFIES WIRELESS BROADBAND INTERNET ACCESS SERVICE AS AN INFORMATION SERVICE, Chelsea Fallon, FCC, 22 March 2007

Well, there is more competition in wireless Internet access than in cable or telco Internet access, but given the track record of this classification thus far in actually promoting more and better services, I have to remain sceptical. Also notice the word “consumers”, not participants.

-jsq

Is It Broke?

I’ve seldom seen so many conclusions reached by pole vault in one paragraph:
Everybody agrees that there are no actual problems with net neutrality, and as our own Chris Wolf explained last week, it doesn’t make sense to fashion legislative remedies to situations that don’t actually need remedying. If anything, it just shows that the supporters of net neutrality laws are looking for any avenue possible to impose restrictions on ISPs that would benefit the big online content companies. Whether through the Senate, through the FCC, through the state legislatures, it doesn’t really matter. Any opportunity to regulate the Internet is one they want to pursue.

— Ask Questions First, Change Policy Later, Hands Off the Internet, April 3, 2007 at 10:24 am

Everybody? Such confidence to be able to speak for everybody with no exceptions! Situations that don’t need remedying? I think the situation before August 2005 needed less remedying; now that the telcos have already gotten the FCC to abrogate net neutrality, the situation does need remedying. Restrictions on ISPs that would benefit the big online content companies? Only in the sense of no new charges for something they’re already paying for, and restraints on the ISPs restriction content or speeds. “Any opportunity to regulate the Internet”; oh my. How dastardly those net neutrality proponents must be! Continue reading →

FCC Local Ownership Study

Well, this is old but interesting:
Former Federal Communications Commission (FCC) lawyer Adam Candeub claims that the government agency destroyed a 2004 study on the implications of local media ownership. The study, which revealed that locally owned television stations provide more local news coverage, blatantly contradicts the FCC’s assertion that “commonly owned television stations are more likely to carry local news,” an argument used by the agency to justify a position in favor of a hands-off approach to media ownership restrictions.

— Senator calls for investigation of buried FCC study, By Ryan Paul, ars technica, September 17, 2006 – 09:58AM CT

It seems somebody gave Senator Barbara Boxer a copy, so its existence is known, even though FCC commissioners deny any knowledge of it. Continue reading →

GSA Awards Three

U.S. General Services Administration awards a record contract:
Dealing a significant blow to Sprint Nextel, the government on Thursday awarded the largest-ever federal telecommunications contract _ a 10-year deal worth up to $48 billion _ to its rivals AT&T, Qwest Communications and Verizon.

The three contract winners will split $525 million, but beyond that they will have to compete with each other for the business of dozens of federal agencies needing to enhance the quality and security of voice, video and data technologies, the General Services Administration announced.

— Phone Deal Goes to Qwest, AT&T, Verizon, By DIBYA SARKAR, The Associated Press, Thursday, March 29, 2007; 5:54 PM

At least there’s an element of competition (with three providers rather than two in previous incarnations of the contract). On the other hand, Sprint had had the contract for 20 years, and losing it means Sprint is less viable, so that could mean one less big telco, and less competition longterm. We’ll see. Meanwhile, there’s another GSA award of similar size coming in May that Sprint expects to win.

Leaving aside Aristotelian conflict for a moment, there’s also the question of content: can any of these telcos provide real fast broadband?

-jsq

Exogenous Technological Change

Here’s a good backgrounder video on where the Internet came from and where it may be going: Humanity Lobotomy. See especially the part by Larry Lessig about how printing presses in the early days cost about $10,000 in 2007 dollars, and lots of people had one and published books and pamphlets.

What did the telephone companies have to do with inventing the Internet?
Nothing.
The browser?
Nothing.
The World Wide Web?
Nothing.
What have they had to do with the Internet from the beginning of time?
Nothing.

–Bob Kahn

What did they invent? Continue reading →