The Obama administration will announce Tom Wheeler as its pick for the next head of the Federal Communications Commission later today, according to a Wall Street Journal report that cites unnamed sources familiar with the matter.

Source: Core Capital Partners

Tom Wheeler

Former FCC chairman Julius Genachowski stepped down from the position back in March after a four-year stint. It wouldn’t be a complete surprise if the WSJ report is true, as many speculated that Wheeler would be among the top candidates for consideration. The report indicates that President Barack Obama will make a formal announcement as soon as Wednesday

As for Wheeler, he’s currently a partner at Washington, D.C.-based venture capital firm Core Capital Partners, which manages $350 million in investments across two different funds. Wheeler has plenty of experience working with communications companies and organizations. He’s the former CEO of trade organization former president of the National Cable Television Association (NCTA), former CEO of the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA), a board member of PBS, and cofounder investor relations service company SmartBrief. Wheeler also has a rather though background in crafting communications policy and serves on  Obama’s Intelligence Advisory Board.

Wheeler is not only familiar with the telecommunications world but also with the startup world, which should please the tech community. Personally, he sounds like a shoo-in for the position, but he’ll still need to gain a vote of approval from the Senate.

If you’re curious about his stances on the communications industry, he writes a column called Mobile Musings. Some of his stances are definitely forward-thinking, but not so much that I’d label him a futurist. For example, he theorizes that mobile payments startup ISIS — which you can use to pay for goods using your mobile device — could eventually use its technology to shape the way we hold elections. And as the WSJ notes, Wheeler was a fan of the merger between AT&T and T-Mobile, which later fell apart after the Federal Trade Commission filed a suit to block it. His logic was that the FCC missed a huge opportunity to add further regulation to the wireless carrier industry.

We’re reaching out to both Wheeler and the FCC for comment, and will update this post with any new information.

Photo via wiredbike/Flickr

The Federal Communications Commission announced today it has hired Michael Steffan as the director of digital learning. In his new role, Steffen will lead initiatives to expand access to broadband Internet in schools.

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski explained, “Broadband and digital tools have game-changing potential for education.” Improving connectivity is a first step toward teachers and students taking advantage of the new education technology.

The appointment is timely given that senators, like John D. Rockefeller IV, are pushing for an extension of the 2010 E-rate program, which subsidizes Internet services for schools and libraries. The FCC believes that these institutions should offer lightning fast connections to the web.

The FCC, which is currently the largest funder of Internet Connectivity in K12 schools across America, has endorsed E-rate reforms. In January, Chairman Genachowski called for the nation’s mayors to bring one-gigabit Internet access to one community in each state by 2015.

Steffen will draw on experience bringing connectivity to America’s most remote school districts. Most recently, he served as the Chairman’s legal advisor on wireline, international, and Internet policy issues. During that time, he oversaw the creation of the Connect America Fund, a broadband infrastructure program for rural America.

The FCC has stepped up its involvement in education, but is also concerned with other sectors, including health care. Last month, the commission appointed Matthew Quinn as Director of Healthcare Initiatives. In this role, Quinn is helping to facilitate the availability of medical devices that require spectrum; and ensuring that rural hospitals and other health care facilities have required connectivity.

Top image via Shutterstock

The Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT just released its budget plan for 2014, which would increase its $61 million budget to $78 million, a 28 percent jump. But it’s a little-reported line item that’s causing a stir among entrepreneurs — a proposal to boost fees for electronic health record vendors.

The ONC is the division within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that leads many initiatives laid out in the Affordable Care Act.

The funding boost in the Obama administration’s proposed budget is a response to the expanding marketplace for health IT. The ONC reports that a new “revenue source” is needed to help it handle the “increasing workload.”

A little-reported line item proposes amped up fees for electronic health record vendors and is a cause for concern for entrepreneurs.

The $1 million user fee “would provide ONC with the necessary resources to meet the increasing demands of health IT vendors,” the plan stipulates. Sources tell me it has a 50 percent chance of being authorized by Congress.

It’s unclear at this point how the ONC would levy the user fee, but it’s plausible that it would be passed down to doctors.

Lauren Fifield, a senior strategist for the free electronic medical record startup Practice Fusion, said the user fee would not be a strain on the industry. The bigger concern is the “high likelihood” that the ONC will use these funds to take on more projects and soon require higher user fee revenues.

Already, EHR vendors are speculating that a user fee charge is the ONC’s way of assuming regulatory authority. “This would be agency creep,” said Fifield, and urged the FDA, FCC and ONC to come together to clarify their roles.

Health IT startups may eventually face charges on revenues akin to the maligned 2.3 percent excise tax on medical devices.

Fifled said this might also create confusion and overregulation for electronic health record developers and entrepreneurs. “The user fee is a slippery slope that could create an even more dysfunctional health IT market,” she said.

Also featured in the 126 pages of program descriptions are several health IT initiatives, including a commitment to examining patient safety, and data security. We’ll be discussing these topics and more at our upcoming HealthBeat conference.

Doctor with electronic health record // Shutterstock

The FCC has confirmed that chairman Julius Genachowski is planning to step down. He formally announced his resignation at an agency all-hands meeting Friday morning.

While Genachowski’s resignation is a big shift for the agency, he didn’t seem to be taking it too hard. “I gathered you all here today to announced that I’m tied for first place in the FCC’s March Madness pool,” he joked as soon as he took the podium this morning. “It’s a big deal and a surprise, and I’m grateful to all of you.”

Genachowski didn’t announce a successor, nor did he reveal what his next plans were. But given how jovial he was during his speech, I don’t think he’s too worried about his next gig.

In his resignation speech, Genachowski pointed to the major progress we’ve seen in the tech world since he became chairman in 2009, including the rising app economy — “A U.S.-made phenomenon that’s created hundreds of thousands of jobs,” he noted — and the fact that annual mobile capital investment has risen 40 percent. He also called out the FCC’s National Broadband Plan, which laid out the steps necessary to bring fast broadband to all Americans.

Last night, sources told Politico, Reuters, and the Wall Street Journal that Genachowski [pictured above, right] was planning to resign. Genachowski, a Democrat, is expected to be the second opening on the commission, as senior Republican Commissioner Robert McDowell has also announced plans to leave. No doubt the tech industry will lobby heavily for favorite candidates for Obama to nominate as head of the agency, which oversees telecommunications, broadband, and broadcast policies.

Genachowski became chairman in 2009 and won approval for his overhaul of the Universal Service Fund, the rules on network neutrality, and the idea of incentive auctions. He helped the FCC veto AT&T’s planned purchase of T-Mobile, but he approved the merger of Comcast and NBC Universal. In that respect, the FCC chairmanship is an extremely powerful position.

And now that the tech industry has grown up and has its own powerful lobby. Obama is expected to nominate both a Democrat and a Republican as part of an attempt to appease both parties. Genachowski’s resignation has been expected for a while. Politico said that a leading candidate is Tom Wheeler, managing director at Core Capital Partners. Others mentioned include Ray Baum, a senior aide to Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.), and Neil Fried, senior telecommunications counsel to the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

Additional reporting by Devindra Hardawar.

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

Good news, everyone! Your frequently crappy cell phone signal should be getting much better thanks to new regulations approved by the Federal Communications Commission today.

The regulations are for the use of devices called boosters, which are able to amplify cellphone signals and should help people who live in rural areas or spots where their phone’s wireless covering is just spotty.

Previously, wireless carriers were against the use of booster devices due to concerns they would cause interference for each others’ customers. However under the new regulations, the boosters must operate on the same band of spectrum as the cellphone signal it’s trying to boost, thus minimizing the chance that cell signals will actually be worse for people. Carriers, consumer activist groups, and device manufacturers agreed on the regulations.

“Removing consumer and industry uncertainty regarding signal booster use and operation will promote further investment in and use of this promising technology. Signal boosters not only help consumers improve coverage where signal strength is weak, but they also aid public safety first responders by extending wireless access in hard-to-serve areas such as tunnels, subways, and garages,” the FCC said in a statement. “This Report and Order reflects a common sense, consensus-based technical solution that will help millions of consumers across the country.”

The new regulations go into effect March 1 and create two classifications of boosters for commercial and industrial use that must adhere to the new FCC-approved standards.

Stuffy spectrum: FCC’s Wi-Fi decongestant proposal

While cell phone boosters may fix one problem, they don’t really address the congestion of wireless spectrum within the country. The growing number of wireless networks and services available in public venues (hotels, airports, coffee shops, etc.) hinders people from connecting their devices.

The FCC also moved to ease some of that congestion today with a proposed plan to make a large chunk of spectrum — currently used by governmental and commercial organizations — available for unlicensed devices like Wi-Fi routers and gadgets using Bluetooth. This would mean fewer connectivity problems for those crowded public areas as well as faster data speeds for those using wireless devices at home. If approved, the proposal would also require that government and commercial groups/services receive consultation to ensure that there isn’t any interference with the new public usage.

“And in the words of The Big Bang Theory’s Sheldon Cooper: ‘Everything is better with Bluetooth,’” said FCC commissioner Ajit Pai in a statement (PDF).

The proposal, which does not indicate the creation of a nationwide public Wi-Fi network, identifies a portion of spectrum that was discussed earlier this month. The FCC wants to free up an additional 195 megahertz of spectrum to increase Wi-Fi in the 5 GHz band by 35 percent.

“Today, the FCC takes a big step to ease congestion on traditional Wi-Fi networks, which will mean faster speeds and fewer headaches for U.S. consumers,” said FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski in a statement.

Sheldon Cooper image courtesy of CBS

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

Well, that was fun while it lasted.

The Washington Post reported earlier this week that the U.S. Federal Communications Commission is planning nationwide Wi-Fi networks. The ensuing storm of coverage debated the pros and cons of free, national wireless coverage, with predictable reactions from the left and right ends of the spectrum.

There’s just one problem: The FCC has no such plans.

A closer look at the FCC website reveals that what the Post’s article is actually talking about (and it’s hard to tell, because the Post doesn’t link to it) is the commission’s proposal to reserve some new bands of wireless spectrum for free, unlicensed use.

Here’s the background: The FCC is getting ready to auction off additional chunks of wireless spectrum, including the “white spaces,” which are currently-unused bands of spectrum in between those allotted to different broadcast TV channels. These frequencies are attractive to broadcasters and wireless technology makers because they can transmit signals over long distances and through obstacles better than today’s Wi-Fi can.

Unlicensed spectrum means you don’t need to get an FCC license to use it. For example, the 2.4GHz and 5GHz bands used by today’s Wi-Fi signals are unlicensed, so anyone can broadcast whatever they want in these frequencies, within certain limits (you can’t transmit with too much power, for instance).

Before the auction can begin, the FCC — informed by public comments — needs to decide exactly which chunks to auction, and which ones to reserve for public use. It’s a long and complicated process. Contained within the FCC’s Oct. 2 auction notices, which kicked off the latest phase of the process, are statements by FCC chairman Julius Genachowski about the importance of unlicensed spectrum.

“In addition to unleashing licensed spectrum, we also propose to free up a significant amount of unlicensed spectrum for Wi-Fi-like uses,” Genachowski wrote in a public statement released in October. “Today’s proposal would create the world’s first nationwide unlicensed spectrum band suitable for robust wireless broadband, on contiguous low-band frequencies.”

Technology companies like Google and Microsoft would love to have more unlicensed spectrum to play with, but broadcasters and wireless carriers want to preserve their competitive advantage (and the value of the spectrum licenses they’ve paid billions of dollars to buy) by minimizing the amount of unlicensed spectrum that’s out there. That’s why carriers keep trying to kill the FCC’s white spaces proposal.

Genachowski’s comments recognized that the proposal was already controversial, but it came down firmly on the side of unlicensed innovation:

Surprisingly, there’s been some disagreement on this. But this is a time to be embracing and extending WiFi-like uses of spectrum, as we take unprecedented steps to free up a very substantial amount of spectrum for licensed use. Unlicensed spectrum has a powerful record of driving innovation, investment, and economic growth – hundreds of billions of dollars of value creation for our economy and consumers. Why would we turn our back on WiFi-like innovation, particularly when we can unleash both licensed and unlicensed spectrum?

When I contacted the FCC for comment today, Neil Derek Grace, a spokesman for the commission, said, “The FCC’s incentive auction proposal, launched in September of last year, would unleash substantial spectrum for licensed uses like 4G LTE. It would also free up unlicensed spectrum for uses including, but not limited to, next generation Wi-Fi. As the demand for mobile broadband continues to grow rapidly, we need to free up significant amounts of spectrum for commercial use, and both licensed and unlicensed spectrum must be part of the solution.”

So there you have it. The FCC is not building a nationwide Wi-Fi network; it just wants to clear the way for companies to build next-generation wireless technologies without having to buy licenses from the government. Also, no free rainbows and ice cream for everyone.

You can still have a pony, though. You’re welcome.

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

File this under brilliant ideas that will never happen: The chairman of the U.S. Federal Communications Commission, Julius Genachowski, has a plan to create a powerful, nationwide Wi-Fi network that will give millions of people access to the Internet.

Update Feb. 5: Actually, the FCC is not proposing a nationwide Wi-Fi network at all.

The Washington Post reports on the plan, which is sure to run into significant opposition from large telcos who will view the network as an unwarranted competitive threat from a government entity. At the same time, the Post reports, Microsoft and Google are throwing their weight behind the idea, because the wireless infrastructure would support and stimulate a wide range of Internet businesses, their own included.

The Wi-Fi would utilize currently unused or underused segments of the wireless spectrum. The varieties of Wi-Fi currently in use occupy frequency bands around 2.4GHz and 5GHz. It’s not clear if the new plan would use those or different bands.

Unfortunately, I haven’t found documentation for the plan on the FCC’s site, and the Post isn’t forthcoming on its sources. It sounds awfully exciting to a constantly bandwidth-starved geek like myself:

The airwaves that FCC officials want to hand over to the public would be much more powerful than existing WiFi networks that have become common in households. They could penetrate thick concrete walls and travel over hills and around trees. If all goes as planned, free access to the Web would be available in just about every metropolitan area and in many rural areas.

The new WiFi networks would also have much farther reach, allowing for a driverless car to communicate with another vehicle a mile away or a patient’s heart monitor to connect to a hospital on the other side of town.

In addition to the telcos, count on American conservatives to oppose the plan, which they’ll likely regard as socialism, along the lines of free health care, free shelter, and free food. (The report doesn’t note whether the FCC proposal will provide wireless services for free or for a fee.)

“Freeing up unlicensed spectrum is a vibrantly free-market approach that offers low barriers to entry to innovators developing the technologies of the future and benefits consumers,” Genachow­ski said in a statement emailed to the Post.

This idea also has an enormous logistical barrier to overcome. Municipal Wi-Fi projects, which aim to blanket entire cities in wireless signals, have often foundered on the complexities of deploying usable signals across just a few square miles. As anyone who has attended a tech conference knows, it’s possible — but surprisingly rare — for a well-managed Wi-Fi network to serve just a few hundred people. Expand the pool to a few million or a hundreds of millions and you may face technical challenges that have not even been imagined yet.

Photo credit: Wi-Fi router by Scott Beale via photopin cc

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

The Federal Communications Commission released a new set of rules today aimed at making it easier for airline carriers to offer their passengers in-flight Internet access — and I don’t think I’m alone when saying it’s about freakin’ time.

Of course, the FCC isn’t solely to blame for all the rigid and ridiculous restrictions placed on Internet access during a flight. The agency jointly regulates in-air communications along with the much more stodgy Federal Aviation Administration, which forces passengers to turn off all electronics before and slightly after a plane takes off.

“These new rules will help airlines and broadband providers offer high-speed Internet to passengers,” FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski told Bloomberg in a statement. Genachowski said he’s been pushing the FAA to approve a revised set of rules regarding electronic usage during flights. For instance, one dire exception the FAA has yet to even acknowledge is being able to use devices like iPads and iPhones during take off if the passenger is using the “Airplane Mode” setting that blocks all Internet connectivity.

Previously, Airlines needed approval by the FCC to offer an in-flight Wi-Fi service, which was a long and slow process that permitted some airlines to offer stellar web services while others were woefully left out. Under the new rules, the FCC will offer airlines an opportunity to meet a set of standards that make sure the Internet service won’t interfere with the plane’s controls or communications while it’s in the air. These standards permit the passenger/consumer Internet access to work with an aircraft’s other communications systems to ensure problems don’t exist.

According to the FCC, the new access rules should lead to faster adoption and licensing of Internet services across all airlines and offer a path toward FAA approval of updated electronic usage regulation.

While I’m glad to hear that I’ll soon have more opportunities to pay $49.95 for unlimited blazing-fast Wi-Fi service on my 75-minute flight to the next airport, I won’t be fully satisfied until flight attendants stop acting like anti-gadget police during take off. Luckily, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) shares my frustration, and earlier this month threatened to introduce new legislation for in-flight electronic use if the FAA doesn’t act soon.

Airplane photo via Chalabala/Shutterstock

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

AT&T’s network will grow quite a bit over the next few years, thanks to the Federal Communications Commission.

The FCC  has approved a slew of the spectrum transfers AT&T’s proposed over the past few months. With the approval, AT&T now has access to blocks in both the “underutilized” Wireless Communications Services (WCS) and the Advanced Wireless Services (AWS) spectrums. AT&T says it expects to put its acquisitions to use in as early as three years.

Any spectrum additions are a big deal for AT&T, which, like every other carrier, has been slammed by the network demands of the smartphone. Getting new spectrum means that AT&T should, in theory, be able to offer better services for its customers — which has been the company’s argument to the FCC all along.

In all, AT&T’s spectrum acquisitions cover 608 cellular markets and 82 percent of the U.S. population. Those are pretty significant numbers that should improve AT&T’s fledging LTE network for many, many Americans.

Photo: Mike Johnson/TheBusyBrain.com

The Federal Communications Commission knows that smartphone owners don’t actually know how much power is in their pockets. The agency released the “Smartphone Security Checker” today, a web app aimed at helping consumers get wise about mobile security.

The FCC launched the web tool in tandem with a number of well-known names in the mobile industry such as RIM, security company Lookout Mobile, McAfee, and others. The tool is simple. You tell it what type of smartphone you have — either BlackBerry, iOS, Android, or Windows Phone — and it gives you security instructions based on that operating system. These instructions include best security apps, safety tips, and how to set up passwords on that particular phone type, as well as ways to backup or wipe your phone.

It’s a simple website, but seeing the government reach out to smartphone users and specifically try to protect them is encouraging — especially in the midst of the holiday season, when millions of smartphones will be gifted. Mobile security is now recognized as a need instead of a “nice to have.” Consumers have their bank accounts, work accounts, health apps, email, and more on their phones — apps that reach much deeper into the person than just text messages and photos.

It also marks a new partnership between the government and security companies like Lookout Mobile, McAfee, and Symantec. For Lookout, this is the latest of a few big partnerships the company has been making over the last year. This includes a partnership with T-Mobile and it’s most recent deal with French mobile carrier Orange, which included an undisclosed amount of funding.

Solidifying the need, Lookout found a new Android scam yesterday called SpamSoldier that parades as a popular free app, such as Angry Birds Space, and instead turns your phone into a bot for its spam campaign. Once installed, the “app” erases its icon from the launch screen and sends out text messages promoting the scam or fake websites to your contact lists.

The More You Know image via Zeusandhera/Flickr

Late last week, the FCC enacted new rules that allow cable companies to encrypt basic cable for the first time ever. Turns out the new rules aren’t scaring prominent set-top box maker Boxee, which was glad some strings were attached.

Boxee CEO Avner Ronen (pictured, center) said in a blog post Sunday that he was “pleased” that many recommendations made jointly by Boxee and Comcast were adopted. These recommendations include that companies like Boxee can access basic channels accessible via IP, so third-party compatibility shouldn’t be a problem.

“The rulemaking ensures startups like Boxee can continue to invest in building products to innovate in the set-top box/connected TV space,” Ronen wrote. “We are also excited about the new opportunity to work with cable companies to provide next-generation experiences that will delight customers and push the industry forward.”

Boxee’s talks with the FCC were the first time the company fought to help shape public policy surrounding technology. “While initially doubtful our voice would be heard and we would be able to make a difference, we were pleasantly surprised to be proven wrong,” Ronen said.

New York City-based Boxee was founded in 2007 and has raised $26.5 million from investors including Union Square Ventures, General Catalyst Partners, SoftBank Capital, Pitango Venture Capital, Spark Capital.

Avner Ronen photo by Sean Ludwig/VentureBeat

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

The Federal Communications Commission has decided to start reporting on mobile broadband speeds across the country, the agency announced today.

The FCC will begin a review process of the mobile networks at a meeting Sept. 21, with the goal of providing customers with a report card of sorts for those networks. The goal is to let people know what kind of service they’re getting versus the service they’re paying for (e.g. if your network speeds and coverage aren’t what was promised, the new report card should let you know). This in turn should spark competition among rival wireless carriers for your business.

The new effort, which is part of the FCC’s overall National Broadband Plan, has gained support both from major wireless carriers and from the CTIA. While industries usually frown upon having to work with an outside party to prove they’re providing customers with a quality product, it’s nice to see that this isn’t the case with U.S. carriers.

“At the open meeting, Commission staff from the Office of Engineering and Technology and the Consumer and Government Affairs Bureau will discuss with interested parties the technical methods for performance testing of mobile broadband Internet service, methodological approaches to remotely acquiring and analyzing such data, and other methodological considerations for the testing of mobile broadband performance,” the FCC said in a statement about the Sept. 21 meeting.

Photo by Sean Ludwig/VentureBeat

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

Federal Communications Committee has approved a deal that will see Verizon purchase a portion of wireless spectrum from a handful of big cable television providers, the federal committee announced today.

The deal’s approval should help alleviate some of the spectrum crunch currently experienced in the wireless industry and speed up existing wireless networks — with Verizon’s new 4G LTE getting the most benefit, of course. However, concerns sprout from groups such as Verizon competitors, federal regulators, and special interest groups about giving the nation’s largest wireless carrier even more spectrum.

The wireless spectrum Verizon is obtaining from the cable companies was initially licensed out by the government with the intention of promoting competition in the wireless service market. Comcast, Time Warner, Bright House and other cable providers ultimately decided that launching their own wireless network didn’t make business sense — meaning the spectrum essentially went unused for years despite the wireless industry’s constant demand for more spectrum to build faster and more reliable wireless networks for consumers.

Originally, the deal would have allowed Verizon to purchase the licenses for the spectrum for $3.6 billion and allow cable companies to run their own branded wireless services through Verizon as well as cross-promote their existing cable TV services within Verizon Wireless retail stores. After some push back from federal regulators as well as other wireless carriers, the Department of Justice approved the deal last week, provided certain stipulations were met.

Under the approved deal, Verizon cannot cross-promote cable TV services from the big cable companies. Verizon also agreed to swap portions of its spectrum with smaller carriers (such as fourth-largest carrier T-Mobile) — a move that quickly caused Deutsche Telekom to put its own stamp of approval on the deal — and provide roaming service at a reasonable rate to other carriers.

“The Commission’s decision is based on a thorough review of the record, which includes extensive data and analysis from the applicants, as well as thousands of comments from interested parties and substantial public input,” the FCC said in a statement. “In addition, Commission staff coordinated closely with the staff of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division (“DOJ”) throughout the review.”

We’ve pasted the full list of stipulations by the FCC below:

• Verizon Wireless must close its proposed spectrum transfer with T-Mobile within 45 days of its closing of the SpectrumCo, Cox, and Leap transactions.
• Within three years, Verizon Wireless will provide signal coverage and offer service to at least 30 percent of the total population in the Economic Areas or the portions of Economic Areas in which it is acquiring AWS-1 license authorizations (calculated by summing the population for each of these areas); and
• Within seven years, Verizon Wireless will provide signal coverage and offer service to at least 70 percent of the population in each Economic Area in which it is acquiring AWS-1 license authorizations, or, where a portion of the Economic Area is acquired, to at least 70 percent of the population of the total acquired portion of the licensed Economic Area.
• In the event the current data roaming rule is not available to requesting providers, Verizon Wireless will continue to offer roaming arrangements for commercial mobile data services on any of its spectrum in the areas where it is acquiring AWS-1 spectrum to other commercial mobile data service providers on commercially reasonable terms and conditions, and providers may negotiate the terms of their arrangements on an individualized basis. This commitment will remain in place for five years following the date of the Commission’s order.
• Verizon must provide on a semi-annual basis, subject to an appropriate protective order, reports concerning trends in DSL subscribership following the implementation of the commercial agreements.

Verizon’s spectrum deal with cable operators is inching closer to final approval.

The Justice Department has approved the deal, which will allow Verizon to pick up unused airwaves from Comcast and other cable companies.

With the spectrum, Verizon says it will be able to give 70 percent of the U.S. population wireless access within the next seven years. Verizon also agreed to let other wireless companies piggyback on the spectrum for use by roaming customers.

Some critics have feared that the deal would hamper competition between companies. That’s never good, the critics say, as it tends to mean higher prices for consumers. To fix this, the Justice Department limited the deal to December 2016 and clamped down on the ability for Verizon and Comcast to cross-promote each other’s products.

The Justice Department appears to be quite happy with its handling of the issue.

“By limiting the scope and duration of the commercial agreements among Verizon and the cable companies while at the same time allowing Verizon and T-Mobile to proceed with their spectrum acquisitions, the department has provided the right remedy for competition and consumers,” Justice Department attorney Joseph Wayland said in a statement.

The next step? Approval by the Federal Communications Commission, which is likely to pass the deal next week.

Verizon may be close to sealing its spectrum deal with major cable companies, say sources close to the company’s negotiations with the U.S. Department of Justice and the Federal Communications Commission.

The DOJ and FCC are currently vetting the purchase, and the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division is likely to place some strict conditions on the arrangement, according to three anonymous sources who spoke to Reuters. The department “had significant concerns about the anticompetitive potential of key features of the proposed agreement,” one of the sources said.

Verizon first announced its intention to buy the spectrum in December. The acquisition includes 122 wireless services licenses from Comcast, Time Warner Cable, and Bright House Networks.

While the extra spectrum would allow Verizon to give its wireless customers faster data service, the matter has stirred up quite a bit of controversy among Verizon’s competitors. T-Mobile, for example, asked the DOJ to kill the deal altogether back in February, arguing that allowing the deal to go through would give Verizon an “excessive concentration” of spectrum, which in turn could stifle competition.

Antitrust regulators have some of the same concerns, especially around Verizon and Comcast cross-marketing each other’s products. In the adjusted deal, FiOS cross-marketing in particular would be prohibited.

The DOJ has been probing the acquisition since it was announced in December 2011. The spectrum Verizon is trying to buy was originally licensed by the government to promote additional competition in the wireless service market.

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

Verizon is currently trying to convince the Federal Communications Commission to approve a deal that would allow the carrier to purchase a section of spectrum currently owned by big cable companies — a move that many smaller carriers, including T-Mobile, claimed would stifle competition.

Now, it seems that T-Mobile has changed its tune.

The two carriers have reached a deal to transfer some of that spectrum if it passes approval by federal regulators, Verizon announced today. T-Mobile is said to be getting the better part of the deal, trading off portions of its spectrum in exchange for Verizon’s as well as purchasing additional spectrum, according to AllThingsD.

T-Mobile said the deal between itself and Verizon will strengthen its forthcoming high-speed LTE network and boost its position in 15 of the top U.S. markets, including Philadelphia, Washington D.C., Detroit, Minneapolis, Seattle, Cleveland, Columbus, Milwaukee, and Rochester, N.Y.

Verizon previously agreed to pay cable companies (Comcast, Time Warner Cable Inc., Bright House Networks, and Cox Communications) $3.6 billion to license a portion of wireless spectrum currently not in use. Cable companies also agreed to cross-market Verizon’s home phone, Internet, and cell-phone services to its customers. T-Mobile previously argued that, if the deal was approved, it would give Verizon an “excessive concentration” of spectrum; and that sentiment was echoed by fifth largest U.S. wireless carrier MetroPCS and 10 special interest groups.

T-Mobile said the new Verizon deal will help strengthen the LTE service that it hopes to begin offering next year. It said the deal will boost its position in 15 of the top 25 U.S. markets, including such cities as Philadelphia, Washington D.C., Detroit, Minneapolis, Seattle, Cleveland, Columbus, Milwaukee, and Rochester, N.Y.

“This is good for T-Mobile and good for consumers, because it will enable T-Mobile to compete even more vigorously with other wireless carriers,” said  T-Mobile CEO Philipp Humm in a statement. “We anticipate FCC approval later this summer, in time for us to incorporate this new spectrum into our network modernization and the rollout of LTE services next year.”

Additionally, Verizon said it will sell off portions of its 700MHz band if all goes according to plan. That may help take some heat off of Verizon from the smaller carriers, but it may not be enough to convince the FCC to approve to deal.

The major broadcast networks won a bit more freedom today, thanks to a Supreme Court decision involving the Federal Communications Commission’s rules for keeping swear words and naked people off live broadcast television.

The high court ruled (PDF) that the FCC is now prohibited from imposing fines and sanctions of any sort for verbal obscenities and indecency. TV stations are slowly gaining the same types of freedoms currently enjoyed by Internet publications, which aren’t limited by what they can communicate.

Previously, any TV network that was broadcast over the public airwaves (free public television via an antenna) was required to adhere to a set of policies. Basically, broadcast stations — like ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, PBS, and others — had to censor certain curse words within programming as well as any nudity. If any of these broadcast stations violated these policies, they got slapped with a huge fine from the FCC and subject to other setbacks.

To determine when a violation occurred, the FCC created a list of words you couldn’t say (and in what context), as well as what’s officially considered naked. ( I remember a Jimmy Kimmel segment from forever ago where he tested these limits by having attractive girls walk around with “3/4 cheek” short shorts.) Some cable programming followed the same policy due to the possibility of running in syndication on a broadcast station. This was an acceptable practice because theoretically anyone (even children) could gain access to a publicly broadcasted program, and initially there wasn’t an Internet to prove how unnecessary these kinds of regulations really are.

The Supreme Court’s decision didn’t, however, invalidate the FCC’s ability to set indecency rules — just its ability to enforce the rules through fines and sanctions. So, you still can’t say George Carlin’s Seven Dirty Words on television, but there is no penalty for breaking the rules now.

That said, I think broadcast content will stay relatively mild for now. But in the future, we might start seeing dead naked bodies on CSI for 30 seconds at a time, and uncensored versions of Home Alone during the Christmas season.

Family Guy image via Fox

Cable TV and Internet service provider Comcast is revising its policy on data caps, the company announced in a very thorough blog post today.

Previously, Comcast limited its residential Internet service subscribers to a 250GB data cap per month, meaning a person could use only 250GB of data before getting penalized through throttling or accruing additional charges. But critics questioned the justification of this data threshold last month and accused the cable giant of disregarding Net Neutrality with its recently launched Xfinity TV Xbox Live app.

In Comcast’s defense, the majority of internet subscribers won’t come anywhere close to reaching the 250GB data cap. And Comcast has previously said that the data caps are there to prevent abuse from a small handful of subscribers who degrade the experience of other customers due to their excessive data usage. But since data is not a utility in the same way that water and electricity are, most people rejected this notion.

Fortunately, Comcast now seems willing to adjust its practices.

“As the market and technology have evolved, we’ve decided to change our approach and replace our static 250GB usage threshold with more flexible data usage management approaches that benefit consumers and support innovation,” Comcast wrote in the post.

Over the next few months, the cable giant said, it’ll be testing at least two new approaches to data capping in different markets (a.k.a. cities). In doing so, it’ll provide details about the trials and their intended effectiveness.

The first approach will start with a data cap of 300GB per month for subscribers of its Internet Essentials, Economy, and Performance Internet service tiers (listed in order of speed performance). That’s 50GB more than the current data cap for the three lower-end tiers of service. Comcast’s two higher-speed Internet service tiers — Blast and Extreme — would have a higher data cap, although the exact threshold isn’t stated. Anyone who exceeds these data caps has the option of purchasing an additional allotment of data. Comcast uses the example of “50GB for $10,” but it’s unclear from the post if this would be the official pricing.

The second approach is similar to the first. Subscribers of all Internet service tiers would have a raised data cap of 300GB per month, as well as the option to purchase an additional allotment of data.

Comcast said it’ll suspend enforcement of its current data capping policy in all non-test markets, while noting that the company will still contact a small number of customers with overly excessive data usage.

While the larger data limits are an incremental improvement for consumers, plenty of critics (and competitors) will likely continue pressing the Federal Communications Commission to force ISPs to justify imposing a data threshold on customers.

“Increasing the data cap is a small step in the right direction, but unfortunately Comcast continues to treat its own Internet-delivered video different under the cap than other Internet-delivered video,” a Netflix spokesperson told StopTheCap. “We continue to stand by the principle that ISPs should treat all providers of video services equally.”

We’re reaching out to Comcast for more specific details of its new data threshold testing and will update the post with any new information.

Comcastic photo via cmorran123 /Flickr

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

Verizon is working on the U.S.’s first-ever emergency texting service.

Text-to-911 will be incredibly useful for a wide range of mobile customers, from the young-and-hip to the hard-of-hearing. It’s also more useful than voice communication in uniquely mobile scenarios, such as low battery or poor signal strength.

Verizon has just selected a vendor for the project; rollout should begin as soon as early 2013. The FCC is applauding the move, which will bring SMS emergency response services to any text-messaging-capable phone.

FCC spokesperson Tammy Sun told TheHill that the organization “commended the company for offering consumers another way to reach 911 that is consistent with how millions of consumers already use mobile devices in their daily lives.”

The FCC itself has been trying to bring 911 emergency services into the land of SMS since at least 2010. In a speech in November of that year, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski told the public, “It is time to bring 911 into the Digital Age.” Since then, the FCC has been soliciting ideas and pushing service providers to modernize 911.

Programs like this already exist in the UK. EmergencySMS allows any user who registers his or her phone to send texts to a call center, where the message is routed to police, fire fighters, or other first responders.

“Verizon is at the forefront of 911 public safety innovations, and today’s announcement is another step in making SMS-to-911 service available to those who cannot make a voice call to 911,” said Verizon VP Marjorie Hsu in a statement.

“Our company is continuing its long-standing commitment to address the needs of public safety and our customers by offering another way to get help in an emergency by using wireless technology.”

The need for more modern 911 options became abundantly clear during a crisis in 2009, when two girls trapped in a storm drain updated their Facebook statuses before contacting emergency services. In a similar scenario, a man used Twitter to report a woman’s seizure because he didn’t have enough battery life for a 911 call.

Whether because of technological literacy, changing hardware capabilities, or our own varying abilities when it comes to hearing, more 911 options are a good thing, and we look forward to hearing more from Verizon — and other carriers — about this trend.

Image courtesy of lightpoet, Shutterstock

Internet access might not be a human right, but having a connection to the web can help people get more access to their rights, to new opportunities, to better information — to the world. And with a $300 million subsidy, the U.S. government is hoping to bring that access to more people in remote areas of the country.

The US. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) announced Wednesday this huge sum would be coming into the Connect America Fund, a program intended to bring broadband Internet connections into nearly half a million rural homes and businesses that currently have no Internet access at all.

The service will come via U.S. telecommunications companies, which have a three-month period to decide whether or not to participate in the new CAF initiative.

The $300 million subsidy comes with some handcuffs; telecoms will have to commit to robust plans to build out their networks. These companies will also likely be bringing investment dollars of their own to the project.

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said the cash infusion represented a “once-in-a-generation reform” of the country’s universal service goals as mandated by the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The chairman also stated, “All Americans will benefit while our nation’s global competitiveness is strengthened.”

The United Nations last year went so far as to call Internet access a human right, stating in a report, “Given that the Internet has become an indispensable tool for realizing a range of human rights, combating inequality, and accelerating development and human progress, ensuring universal access to the Internet should be a priority for all states.”

via The Hill

If its lobbying spend is any indication, Google is trying to woo the government. The search giant spent triple what it did a year ago on lobbying efforts in Washington, according to The Hill.

Google’s spending in Washington, D.C. has increased as government agencies continue to scrutinize the company’s data privacy practices. Just last week, the FCC fined Google a paltry $25,000 for “deliberately impeding” investigations into its “accidental” snooping of Wi-Fi networks. And earlier this year, Google attracted a ton of attention for completely revamping its privacy policies.

The company’s main concerns in D.C. have been privacy legislation, including rules on online tracking, and cyber security legislation, including the controversial Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) bill. CISPA could enable companies to share private user information with the government to help it fight and prevent cyber security attacks. Google has not taken a position one way or the other on CISPA, so it’s hard to tell which side it’s playing.

Getting down to specifics, Google spent $5.03 million on lobbying from January to March, which is a 240 percent increase over the $1.48 million it spent in the first quarter of 2011. That’s not much compared to the $10.6 billion in revenue it cleared in Q1 2012, but every bit helps in Washington. Google CEO Larry Page used that earnings call to announce a Google stock split, something else it could be lobbying about.

Photo credit: Vasilevich Aliaksandr/Shutterstock

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

Two U.S. senators are asking federal regulators to reconsider their decision to forbid of troubled startup LightSquared from launching its high-speed wireless network.

LightSquared’s business strategy involved building out a high-speed wireless network that would generate revenue by selling network access to outside companies, such as Walmart, Best Buy, and others. In February, however, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rejected LightSquared’s plans to launch its LTE network due to concerns that it would interfere with both commercial and military GPS technology. Because of this development, several high-profile clients — such as Leap Wireless, FreedomPop, and Sprint-Nextel –  terminated their service agreements with LightSquared. The startup and its investors stand to lose billions if a solution to the interference problem isn’t found that is satisfactory to the FCC.

In response to LightSquared’s turmoil, Senators John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) have asked FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski to allocate a different portion of spectrum to LightSquared, which would solve the GPS interference problems.

“In the short-term, we urge you to work with industry and the relevant federal agencies to find consensus on alternate spectrum for LightSquared’s proposed network,” the senators wrote in a letter obtained by The Hill. “Advancing LightSquared’s network in a consensus manner would increase competition in the wireless broadband market and promote the public interest.”

More recently, LightSquared investors are contemplating filing for voluntary bankruptcy, which could be the only option the startup has if a solution to the interference problem isn’t found soon.

Republicans in the U.S. government are seeking to limit the Federal Communication Commission’s power to oversee mergers in the tech and telecommunications arena.

The Federal Communications Commission Process Reform Act passed in the House of Representatives last night, 274-174, with only 12 Democrats voting in favor of the bill. The legislation seeks to bring more oversight to the big (and rapidly accelerating) business of communications mergers and acquisitions.

Recently, the FCC was involved in the approval of major deals such as Google’s $12.5 billion acquisition of Motorola Mobility — a combination that had many sidelines-bound watchers scratching their heads. Google carefully avoided the appearance of antitrust issues, and the FCC, which was involved primarily because Motorola Mobility owned some licenses under the commission’s jurisdiction, gave the deal the nod.

However, about a year ago, when AT&T announced its intention to acquire T-Mobile for $39 billion, the FCC was the agency that needed to decide whether or not the deal would leave the wireless industry competitive. In the end, when the FCC chair decided the merger would be bad for consumers, and the companies’ application to the FCC was killed off and withdrawn.

And then there was the Comcast-NBC merger, which the FCC approved but with some interesting stipulations about content.

The new proposed legislation does require more transparency from the FCC on merger applications and other activities, but it might impede the FCC’s ability to propose stipulations that promote the public interest — for example, the FCC’s pressuring Comcast for more diversity-friendly programming during the NBC merger.

House Democrats argued that the reform bill would effectively shut down the FCC, and some question whether the bill will pass muster with Senate Democrats. However, Democrats on Capitol Hill are making amendments to the bill as it works its way through the legislative branch.

The U.S. Department of Justice is claiming telecommunications-giant AT&T pocketed millions of dollars in reimbursement fees by ignoring fraudulent use of the IP Relay call system.

The IP Relay call service is a website that allows people in the U.S. to communicate by text to a live AT&T operator, who will then read the typed words to the person they’re trying to call on the phone. While the service is intended to help people with hearing or speech impairments, it doesn’t stop people without impairments from using it.

For example, in my youth I recall friends using the service to conduct extremely inappropriate prank conversations through a stranger’s voice — thus creeping out both the poor operator who was forced to read what we typed, as well as the person on the other side of the telephone. You could pretty much get away with saying anything (anything) as long as you didn’t disclose that you didn’t have a speech or hearing impairment.

Little did I know, the prank was actually costing U.S. taxpayers $1.30 per minute, which the Federal Communications Commission reimbursed back to the telephone company in charge of setting up the service.

The only time the FCC wouldn’t reimburse that money was if the calls were made by people outside of the country, or if they were from people who were not hearing impaired. In the early days of the Internet, there weren’t very many ways to reliably determine which calls were valid for reimbursement, so companies like AT&T netted tons of government cash. (I suspect this is why AT&T was perfectly fine with letting us use the service for raunchy prank calls with little objection.)

However, in 2009, the FCC started requiring phone companies to verify the person using the IP Relay service was both in the U.S. and legitimately suffering from a hearing impairment.

This week, the Justice Department claimed AT&T ignored fraudulent use of the service. The Justice Department also estimates that about 95 percent of AT&T’s total IP Relay call volume came from fraudulent users outside of the country, with thousands of calls coming from Nigeria alone.

“Taxpayers must not bear the cost of abuses of the Telecommunications Relay system,” said David J. Hickton, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania.  “Those who misuse funds intended to benefit the hearing- and speech-impaired must be held accountable.”

Unsurprisingly, AT&T has disputed the Justice Department’s claims. A company spokesperson told Ars Techica: “As the FCC is aware, it is always possible for an individual to misuse IP Relay services, just as someone can misuse the postal system or an email account, but FCC rules require that we complete all calls by customers who identify themselves as disabled.”

Full statement from the Justice Department about the AT&T lawsuit below:

The United States has filed a complaint against AT&T Corporation under the False Claims Act for conduct related to its provision of Internet Protocol (IP) Relay services, the Justice Department announced today.   AT&T is a global conglomerate that provides a wide variety of telecommunications services, including Telecommunications Relay Services (TRS) for the deaf and hard-of-hearing.

IP Relay is a text-based communications service designed to allow hearing-impaired individuals to place telephone calls to hearing persons by typing messages over the Internet that are relayed by communications assistants (CAs) employed by an IP Relay provider.   IP Relay is funded by fees assessed by telecommunications providers to telephone customers, and is provided at no cost to IP Relay users.   The FCC, through the TRS Fund, reimburses IP Relay providers at a rate of approximately $1.30 per minute.   In an effort to reduce the abuse of IP Relay by foreign scammers using the system to defraud American merchants with stolen credit cards and by other means, the FCC in 2009 required providers to verify the accuracy of each registered user’s name and mailing address.

The United States alleges that AT&T violated the False Claims Act by facilitating and seeking federal payment for IP Relay calls by international callers who were ineligible for the service and sought to use it for fraudulent purposes.   The complaint alleges that, out of fears that fraudulent call volume would drop after the registration deadline, AT&T knowingly adopted a non-compliant registration system that did not verify whether the user was located within the United States.   The complaint further contends that AT&T continued to employ this system even with the knowledge that it facilitated use of IP Relay by fraudulent foreign callers, which accounted for up to 95 percent of AT&T’s call volume.   The government’s complaint alleges that AT&T improperly billed the TRS Fund for reimbursement of these calls and received millions of dollars in federal payments as a result.

“Federal funding for Telecommunications Relay Services is intended to help the hearing- and speech-impaired in the United States,” said Stuart F. Delery, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division of the Department of Justice.   “We will pursue those who seek to gain by knowingly allowing others to abuse this program.”

“Taxpayers must not bear the cost of abuses of the Telecommunications Relay system,” said David J. Hickton, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania.  “Those who misuse funds intended to benefit the hearing- and speech-impaired must be held accountable.”

The claims in the United States’ complaint are allegations only; there has been no determination of liability.

Operator image via AT&T/YouTube screenshot

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

The hits keep coming for wholesale wireless network startup LightSquared, which just lost big client Leap Wireless due to uncertainty about the future of its high-speed LTE network.

Back in February, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rejected LightSquared’s plans to launch its LTE network due to concerns that it would interfere with both commercial and military GPS technology. Because of this development, Leap Wireless has decided to buy future LTE connectivity for its Cricket prepaid service from Clearwire, another troubled wireless company (of which Sprint is the largest stakeholder). Earlier this year, LightSquared client FreedomPop also decided to go with Clearwire. The real nail in the coffin for LightSquared will be if the $9 billion 15-year agreement with Sprint-Nextel to build and host its LTE network falls through.

The have been some rumors that the startup will propose swapping its licensed portion of the wireless spectrum with the U.S. Department of Defense. And considering how hard LightSquared has fought to launch its LTE network in its current form, such a move would be more of a headache. For now, the company is committed to fighting back on the FCC’s original decision by hiring a handful of high-profile legal representatives, such as former President George W. Bush’s lawyer from the 2000 presidential election Bush v. Gore case, Ted Olsen, and (Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s son) Eugene Scalia. Both men are partners are partners at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher.

“Their (FCC’s) decision to not allow us to go forward isn’t supported by the law or technical policy. We are confident about that and we are eager to prove our case,” LightSquared EVP of Regulatory Affairs Jeff Carlisle told Bloomberg. He also noted that hiring the law firm doesn’t necessarily rule out the possibility that Lightsquared will pursue other actions to preserve its initial business plans.

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

In an ironic turn of events, the fourth largest U.S. carrier T-Mobile is asking the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to halt Verizon’s pending acquisition of additional wireless spectrum currently licensed by some of the nation’s biggest cable companies.

Verizon previously agreed to pay cable companies (Comcast, Time Warner Cable Inc., Bright House Networks, and Cox Communications) $3.6 billion to license a portion of wireless spectrum currently not in use. In return, the cable companies will cross-market Verizon’s phone, video, Internet and cell phone services to its customers. Additionally, Verizon has also agreed to halt any further build out of its FiOS broadband cable TV and Internet service.

T-Mobile is arguing that allowing the deal to go through would give Verizon an “excessive concentration” of spectrum, which in turn could stifle competition. Verizon, on the other hand, is defending the deal because it will allow the company to boost download speeds and better facilitate the growing number of data-hungry smartphone customers.

The fact that T-Mobile is against allowing any one company to control a vast portion of spectrum is interesting. Just months ago, the company unsuccessfully fought for federal regulators to approve its $39 billion merger with AT&T. The merger fell through in December 2011, leaving T-Mobile, once again, the smallest of the big fish carriers.

T-Mobile isn’t the only one urging the FCC to stop Verizon from obtaining more spectrum. The fifth largest wireless carrier MetroPCS and 10 special interest groups have also filed petitions with the FCC in regards to blocking Verizon’s deal.

Via WSJ; Image via Freepress.net

A rule change, supported by the cable companies, is currently being considered by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that would enable the encryption of basic tier cable. A decision could be made in just a few weeks time.

The change would force consumers who currently connect their television sets directly to cable lines for free or low-cost basic-tier cable to use a set-top box (typically provided by cable companies for a monthly fee) for the same access.

“In the late eighties and early nineties, increasing numbers of cable systems started to encrypt their signals, and the rule was adopted to allow people to at least access some programming without renting a converter box,” said John Bergmayer, senior staff attorney at open Internet advocate group Public Knowledge.

Depending on how the proposed change is enacted, low-income consumers could be hit with fees for services that were previously available to them free of charge. Public Knowledge, which initially came out in support of the proposed change because the FCC has already been issuing waivers on a system-by-system basis since 2009, has petitioned the FCC to allow for a transition period and require cable companies to provide low-capability set-top boxes free of charge to prevent “bill shock.”

But the group eventually stumbled upon a harmful side-effect of the new legislation that could wipe out innovation in the TV sector, and is now asking the FCC to seek further information.

“We think it’s worthwhile to make sure that the FCC doesn’t do a rule change that has negative consequences that they didn’t foresee,” Bergmayer told VentureBeat. The FCC, he said, has previously come out in support of innovation and competition around entertainment devices, but the rule-making should jeopardize the well-being of the startups bringing these very same devices to market.

Boxee, one such startup, makes a set-top box for watching Internet content on television sets. The company recently released a Live TV stick that acts as a high-powered HD antenna and provides streamers with access to local stations. The offering is the most compelling release yet for would-be cord cutters and thus a threat to the cable companies. But should the FCC eliminate unencrypted access to basic tier capable, Boxee’s Live TV stick would be useless for 40 percent of owners, and its business would be at risk.

As such, the startup, which only recently found out about the proposed change, presented concerns and research to the FCC on February 1. Boxee told that the FCC that permitting encryption would force millions of consumers to rent set-top boxes, harm startups in the space, and stifle competition in the marketplace. It also proposed the adoption of IP-based standards as an alternative solution.

Now, Boxee is asking its supporters to send notes to the FCC, and Public Knowledge is lending its support to the comparably little New York-based company as it goes to head-to-head with cable companies.

Unfortunately, the gossip on the street, Bergmayer said, is that the FCC could issue a ruling in a few weeks. The organization hopes that the FCC will keep the docket open long enough to make a more informed decision.

Photo credit: TV image/Shutterstock

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

The United States Congress is readying a new piece of legislation aimed at preventing unauthorized use of your cellphone data.

The Mobile Device Privacy Act (PDF), released today by Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.), is in direct response to the recent controversy caused by data tracking software Carrier IQ. That software is designed to help cellphone companies track the performance of their devices, but many critics believe it’s far too intrusive because it records users’ web browser history, text messages and location, and every keystroke.

Under the proposed legislation, companies would be required to disclose if they are using data-tracking software, as well as the type of data that’s being collected or tracked. The bill also requires cellphone companies obtain the consent of customers before they can implement such data tracking software.

While I’m OK with cellphone companies or device manufacturers collecting usage data about my cellphone habits, I definitely don’t want that information shared with third-party organizations. Since many others are likely to agree, the bill stipulates any company that wants to transfer data to third parties must file an application with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

Via The Hill

PIPA and SOPA would give the U.S. government and copyright holders the authority to seek court orders against foreign websites associated with infringing intellectual property. Following a widespread online protest from prominent web companies, authors of both pieces of legislation have decided that the bills need to be reworked before being put to the House or Senate for vote.

When asked about SOPA, Genachowski narrowly avoided disclosing whether he was pro or anti SOPA, but said that the vital importance of preserving a free and open Internet does not have to be at the odds with legislation that ensures effective mechanisms are in place to enforce intellectual property.

This wishful-thinking viewpoint is in direct contrast to Y Combinator creator Paul Graham’s recent call for the death of Hollywood.

“Hollywood appears to have peaked. If it were an ordinary industry (film cameras, say, or typewriters), it could look forward to a couple decades of peaceful decline,” Graham said. “But this is not an ordinary industry. The people who run it are so mean and so politically connected that they could do a lot of damage to civil liberties and the world economy on the way down. It would therefore be a good thing if competitors hastened their demise.”

Genachowski, however, hopes that engineers and Internet entrepreneurs can work together with IP rights holders to figure out a way to preserve the open architecture of the web and give content creators the projection they’re entitled to. He did not elaborate on how a compromise between the two dissenting parties could be achieved.

Genachowski also talked at length about the FCC’s mission to free up more wireless spectrum, echoing the statements he made at the Consumer Electronics Show in Vegas. The largest need for change in regulatory policy is mobile and spectrum, he said. The demand generated by smartphones and tablets is going up 35 fold a year, but the supply of spectrum has stayed essentially flat, he added.

The chairman is advocating for a two-sided auction system, as previously laid out, that would allow spectrum holders to exchange spectrum they’re not using in exchange for proceeds. The FCC would realign the spectrum, free it up and put it on the market in auctions that could generate up to $25 billion in profits.

The U.S. is ahead of most of the world in rolling out 4G and will be the first country where the spectrum crisis will hit, but every country will face this problem, he warned.

Disclosure: The Digital Life Design conference paid my way to Munich. VentureBeat’s coverage of the DLD 12 conference remains objective and independent.

[Image via Hubert Burda Media/Flickr]

The U.S. needs to address the looming wireless spectrum crunch to allow for continued innovation in broadband wireless, Federal Communications Commission chairman Julius Genachowski said Wednesday at the Consumer Electronics Show.

One of the ways to do that is to offer so-called incentive auctions that motivate the owners of current wireless spectrum to make them available to those who bid the highest. New York City, Genachowski said, does not need 28 TV stations using valuable spectrum that could be returned for use in wireless applications, and raising money not only for the private companies that own the spectrum but also billions of dollars in money that could help address the budget deficit.

He said a third of Americans — almost 100 million people — don’t have broadband at home. Closing the gap between haves and have nots would give the innovators much larger markets to go after. At the same time, the U.S. leads in the number of 3G subscribers and the American mobile industry has recaptured leadership in the industry. Tens of thousands of jobs have been creaetd.

“Our apps economy is the envy of the world,” he said.

Yet the spectrum shortage was one of the reasons that AT&T made its ill-fated bid to acquire T-Mobile, which owns a lot of spectrum, because of the rapid growth of data usage on mobile devices. Genachowski said that we need to get incentive auctions done for wireless spectrum and “we need to get it right,” he said. “We’ve led the world in spectrum policy.” He urged Congress to adopt legislation to endorse incentive auctions to make the U.S. more competitive with the rest of the world.The approvals should apply to licensed and unlicensed spectrum.

At the same time, he said in a conversation with Gary Shapiro, chief executive of the Consumer Electronics Association at the annual Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, that the U.S. should innovate in making wireless spectrum more spectrally efficient by developing new wireless technologies. Without such approval, the country could fall behind.

While many people note that technology destroys jobs in the old economy, Genachowski said studies have shown that 2.6 jobs are created for every one destroyed in the innovation economy.

Last year, Genachowski told Shapiro that innovation was needed for U.S. companies to stay competitive in the creation of 4G wireless networks by moving faster, without interference.

This year, Genachowski walked the show floor and took note that there were more than 3,000 of them, each of them creating new jobs.

“Virtually every company is fueled by broadband Internet,” he said. “If you shut off the internet, virtually nothing on the show floor would work.”

He said there was innovation in education, healthcare, business, and other categories.

“We saw smart textbooks, smart thermostats, and smart fitness equipment,” he said.

He noted that Thomas Friedman, columnist for the New York Times, wrote recently that when bandwidth goes up, the technology gets better and the products get more useful communications, Genachowski said.

“Though we can’t see it, spectrum is becoming increasingly essential to the daily lives of almost every American. This invisible infrastructure is the backbone of a growing percentage of our economy and our lives,” Genachowski said. He added that the looming spectrum crunch “threatens American leadership in mobile and the benefits it can deliver to our economy and our lives.”

Last year at CES, Genachowski also discussed wireless spectrum and what it means for universal broadband in America — but we found him to be vague on actual goals. This time around, it’s clear that both Genachowski and the FCC have a plan.

And this time, Genachowski made the case again for his long-awaited National Broadband Plan, which details what needs to be done to expand broadband access to all Americans.

As for the failed AT&T and T-Mobile merger, “it should remind us the benefits of competition.” Genachowski said that on balance, the system has worked. But in this case, AT&T, an American company, had to pay $3 billion to a German company because the deal was not consummated, Shapiro said. The law was sufficiently vague enough on antitrust matters that AT&T’s lawyers gave the merger a try.

For more news out of this week’s Consumer Electronics Show, be sure to check out VentureBeat’s live coverage from CES 2012.