Michael Ventimiglia is a writer and editor at GetVoIP.com.

Things have been heating up between the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the VoIP industry lately. It’s undeniable that the government installation has taken a more active interest in the future of the industry; however, they have often found themselves with little grounds to do so.

For example, earlier this year AT&T stated that under the state-based American Legislative Exchange Council’s model Internet is defined as an “informative service,” not a telecommunications service; therefore, the FCC has little right to regulate VoIP service. Additionally, the provider also look ed to abolish more regulation. In doing so the FCC was met with tremendous backlash—which has furthered the FCC’s interest in regulation.

And yet, despite all inner conflict, the FCC looks primed to implement new regulatory policies.

Today, the world is abuzz as FCC Commission Chairman, Julius Genachowski, a key figure in monitoring and regulating the technology industry, announced his resignation. Additionally, Commissioner Robert McDowell has also announced his planned departure. McDowell has been a formidable presence against the government’s involvement with the internet. That being said, McDowell’s stance was hinged on keeping US and foreign governments as well as the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) away from internet regulation/control while stunting the UN’s control over the platform. Now, with his imminent departure on the horizon, the FCC’s role looks likely to change.

With this shift in personnel comes rabid speculation — i.e. who fill these men’s shoes, and what effect will these departures have on regulatory practices and policies. The next regime within the FCC will be forced to deal with a number of rising issues, including the decline of traditional phone service, the pros and cons of VoIP regulation, making broadband universal service, the standardizing of services, and user/provider/government concerns.

It seems likely that both FCC chairs’ replacements will come from both the Republican and Democratic parties. While this seems a minor detail, it’s important as both parties will be able to elect their own candidate regardless of their variances in ideas. This is definitely good news. With broader representation, it’s more likely that policies will be subject to more than one ideal/perspective; therefore, they may better represent a medium.

Yet regardless of who fills both Genachowski’s and McDowell’s shoes, it seems clear that the FCC will take a more active role in regulating/monitoring both VoIP as well as the internet at large. The days of using legal technicalities to evade regulation look to be over.

Speculation may be at fever pitch, but the facts are there too. In an increasingly connected, internet-based world it only makes sense for the government to pursue a more active role. Additionally, as PSTN services fade and VoIP continues to expand, regulation becomes more an eventuality than a possibility. The FCC, users/consumers, and service providers undoubtedly have their concerns—i.e. would increased regulation ultimately yield positive or negative effects? Would the industry’s size and growth be stunted, or would increased regulation be better for users?

However, it looks as though the gears are in motion. Regardless of stances both for and against, increased FCC presence seems inevitable. Even so, while changes loom on the horizon the future of the VoIP industry remains unclear.

Michael Ventimiglia is GetVoIP.com’s writer and editor. With experience in a variety of fields, Mike is able to offer unique insights on every facet of the VoIP industry, as well as other fields of technology.

VoIP call photo via Shutterstock

Popular ride-sharing startup Lyft got a green light today to continue operating while the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) re-examines its policies.

In their efforts to bring new transportation options to urban residents, these services have consistently butt heads with the authorities. In November, we reported that hefty citations were levied against Uber, Lyft and SideCar, prompting users to launch an online petition.

But today, the PUC agreed to suspend the $20,000 fine and cease and desist notice against Lyft. The State is taking six months to perform background checks and assess whether these services are in compliance. The CPUC has not yet reached any similar agreement with Uber and SideCar.

The CPUC is considering new regulations that could legalize ride-sharing. In December it issued a proposal for new rulemaking. The proposal states that this is “a situation not encountered before,” and that it will evaluate how these new businesses are using “mobile communications and social networks to connect individuals wishing to offer and receive low cost and convenient, sometimes shared, transportation.”

Lyft responded to the news by announcing plans to expand into Los Angeles. It has already begun recruiting drivers in its first new city outside of San Francisco.

Since it launched in August, Bay Area residents have become familiar with Lyft’s fleet of moustache-adorned cars. Payment is donation-based and often works out cheaper than a taxi. Users can order a ride from their smartphone in a matter of seconds, and a car will typically arrive in 10 minutes or less.

A commission press release said:

“The terms of the agreement are intended to ensure the public safety of both riders and drivers through the CPUC’s interim oversight of Zimride [Lyft's parent company] during the rulemaking through safety requirements that include continued proof of insurance, Department of Motor Vehicle checks, and national criminal background checks.”

This is a significant step forward in the protracted battle between ride-sharing services and State authorities. But the fight isn’t over. Today, users launched a Change.org petition to show support for Uber in an ongoing regulatory battle in Denver.

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

In a double-whammy for Verizon, the Federal Communications Commission announced today that the carrier must let its customers use third-party apps to turn their phones into mobile hotspots, and Verizon will also have to pay a $1.25 million fee to settle with the FCC over blocking the tethering apps so far.

Verizon Wireless charges customers $20 a month to use the mobile hotspot feature on their phone, which allows them to share Internet access with other devices. But plenty of Android apps, like PDANet, also do the same thing for free, and it wasn’t too long before Verizon decided to clamp down. The FCC found that Verizon ultimately couldn’t block the tethering apps, since it acquired 700 MHz spectrum for its 4G LTE network in 2008 that required it to maintain an open network.

“Today’s action demonstrates that compliance with FCC obligations is not optional,” FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said in statement today. “The open device and application obligations were core conditions when Verizon purchased the C-block spectrum. The massive innovation and investment fueled by the Internet have been driven by consumer choice in both devices and applications. The steps taken today will not only protect consumer choice, but defend certainty for innovators to continue to deliver new services and apps without fear of being blocked.”

Verizon will still be allowed to charge for tethering on customers with grandfathered unlimited data accounts (but since it can’t detect the tethering apps anymore, that doesn’t really matter.) Verizon’s recent tiered data plans already include free tethering, so the carrier likely saw this settlement coming for a while. The news mainly affects Android, as iOS and Windows Phone don’t have legitimate third-party tethering apps in their app stores.

AT&T spent $1.9 billion last year on Qualcomm’s 700 MHz spectrum block, but unfortunately for its subscribers (this reporter included), it wasn’t required to keep that spectrum open. Similarly, Sprint and T-Mobile’s networks won’t be affected by this decision.

While Verizon is licking its wounds, the FCC’s decision is a good one for consumers, and it may even attract new subscribers to the carrier. Unfortunately for Verizon, data hogs are just about the least desirable subscribers.

As part of the settlement, Verizon will have to train its employees on the new tethering policy; get legal counsel review on communications with Google and other app store providers; and report non-compliance over the next two years.

Via GigaOm

The dust from SOPA and PIPA is settling, but the hacker community knows that it canbe kicked up again at any moment. In the run up to WCIT, the World Conference on Telecommunications, former ICANN chief executive Rod Beckstrom called for the hacker community to protect the Internet from regulation.

“It’s not merely that everybody should be able to communicate with everybody else at any time, it’s that people actually want to,” said Dan Kamisky at the Def Con conference in Las Vegas. “It’s not just a reconfiguration of government, it’s a reconfiguration of human social behavior.”

WCIT will be a seminal moment for the Internet. There, the International Telecommunications Regulations will be decided — a document that will touch all Internet users whether they know it or not. According to Beckstrom, the Internet needs to be an organized chaos. And to keep the Internet free and open for all, hackers across the world need to start talking to their lawmakers.

“We should not move our nation of the Internet from a multi-stakeholder model, which includes all voices, to a process that only includes one,” said Beckstrom at Def Con.

Beckstrom believes the Internet should remain open, global, neutral, governed by multi-stakeholders (which does include governments), with little regulation. The only way to make this happen is to communicate with legislators, and more importantly, learn how to explain technology in simple terms.

The panel used SOPA as an example of this. When the bill surfaced, many attacked supporters of SOPA and PIPA — both verbally and with a variety of DDOS and other offensive techniques. Acts such as these, and simply the anger with which SOPA was met may have intimidated policymakers into being mute, afraid to ask the right technical questions.

Akamai director of security intelligence Josh Corman fears lawmakers will be scared into making “stupid policy decisions” while reacting to malicious hacks and other public displays of infection. For him, tyranny breeds chaos, which breeds tyranny. Because of this, hackers don’t just have a responsibility to talk with lawmakers, but with those in the community who may be using malicious attacks.

“Don’t judge them,” said Corman, “Mentor them.”

Either way, send your funding tips to tips@venturebeat.com. For more funding news as it happens, subscribe to our Deals Channel feed. You can also follow VentureBeat on Twitter, @venturebeat, to view funding news as it’s published.

Zadara completes $7M for VPSAs (not to be confused with vespas) 

Zadara Storage has completed a $7 million first round of funding that will be put towards getting the word out on its service, which gives companies more control, speed, and security over their portion of the cloud. Zadara buys or rents hardware within the data centers of Amazon, Rackspace, and OpSource. It then sells that storage, along with proprietary software, to its customers as “Virtual Private Storage Arrays” that connect to cloud servers. The round was led by Genesis Capital Advisors and Platinum Management. Read more on VentureBeat.

BV Capital unifies 5 international funds onto one global platform called E.ventures

Investment firm BV Capital launched a global venture platform today, unifying its five funds around the world under one heading and rebranding itself as E.ventures. The integration is in an effort to emphasize the firm’s global perspective and promote international collaboration. With the unification, portfolio companies will be able to access financial and technological resources from all over the world as well as see increased opportunities for international growth.

BV Capital focuses on early-stage startups. It has invested in companies such as Groupon, Angie’s List, Shopping.com, and Sonos. Since 1997, it has invested nine funds totaling over $750 million in capital. It is headquartered in San Francisco and has offices in Berlin, Hamburg, Beijing, Tokyo, and most recently, Sao Paulo. Read more on VentureBeat.

aPriori secures $5 million for cost reduction software far more effective than penny pinching

aPriori, a company that creates software to help manufacturing companies cut costs, secured $5 million in new venture capital from existing investor Sigma Partners. This announcement followed the latest release of its platform in April and record results from the past fiscal year.

aPriori will use the money to expand the company’s sales and service teams to Europe and accelerate development in the Asia Pacific region. It will also be put towards a new Supplier Network initiative that will address demand from the automotive, aerospace, and industrial machinery industries by giving them greater access to aPriori’s quote generating technology. The company is based in Concord, MA. Read the press release.

LockPath brings in $6M to help companies stay on the straight and narrow

Security software company LockPath raised $6 million in its second round of funding. Its Keylight platform provides governance, risk, and compliance (GRC) applications to companies that need assistance managing regulatory compliances and risk factors. The technology correlates security information from multiple sources with current regulations and policies to gauge risk.

The round was led by El Dorado Ventures, an entrepreneur-focused, early-stage venture capital firm, with participation from Vesbridge Partners and the Webb Investment Network. This round follows the $2 million LockPath raised in 2011, also led by El Dorado. The company is headquartered in Kansas City, Kansas. Read the press release.

Live Nation buys Rexly to help get its groove back

As part of an ongoing effort to bring innovation back to ticketing conglomerate Live Nation, the company’s months-old investment vehicle, LN Labs, has acquired social music discovery startup Rexly. Rexly is the San Francisco–based, angel-backed startup that makes an iPhone application by the same name for discovering music through friends. The terms of the deal weren’t disclosed, but two of Rexly’s cofounders are joining Live Nation and opening up a new LN Labs office in San Francisco to focus primarily on mobile. Read more on VentureBeat.

Brammo raises $13M to make motorcycle racing a green sport

Brammo Inc., a leading developer of electric vehicle technology recently announced it closed $13 million in a third round of funding. This capital is the first tranche of a $45 million round and brings the total funding to $53.5 million.

Brammo manufactures electric motorcycles that are well-known in the world of motor sports. This first chunk of investment is intended to spur the company’s development plans. It was led by Polaris Industries, a company that manufactures off-road vehicles like ATVs, snowmobiles, and golf carts, as well as powersport vehicles.

The investment is part of a strategic partnership with Polaris that will provide Brammo with opportunities to integrate its electric vehicle technology into more sporting platforms. In October of last year, Polaris invested $28 million in Brammo. That Series B was intended to help Brammo solidify its position in the market. Read more on VentureBeat. 

Marketers have been increasingly enamored with the power of “Big Data,” and Washington has clearly taken notice. If you’ve been living under a rock and haven’t heard the growing buzz around consumer privacy, such as “Do Not Track,” let me quickly get you up to speed.

The proliferation and love of Big Data

We all know that people are interacting online and sharing content with friends, “Liking” their favorite brands, and clicking on interactive ads on a larger scale than they could have years ago. Naturally, this shift has provided publisher and marketer brands an opportunity to better understand who their readers and consumers are, and how to reach them in the most relevant and effective way.

As a result of the massive volume of online interactions, today’s marketers — as well as what we might call “Big Data Architects” such as Facebook, Google, Amazon, Quantcast, and now my firm, 33Across — have various forms of anonymous and registered data on billions of users around the world as a guiding resource. While this has garnered a lot of Washington attention, what gets publishers and marketers even more nervous (trust me) is the prospect of losing access to the rich data derived from social engagement, influence, and interest—perhaps the most advanced form of social research known to man.

Without these insights, we undoubtedly risk a much dreaded regression back to the pre-social targeting days of arbitrarily placed, blinking, monkey ads. (This was not that long ago, so I’m sure we can all recall how painful that was.)

Big Data is at an inflection point

Make no mistake: there is a grave concern that the Federal Government will make potentially devastating changes to our industry. The growing interest and tsunami of national media coverage around Do Not Track speaks to the need to make sure users’ privacy is protected, as well as to give them easy access to see and opt-out of how they are tracked online. These initiatives are top of mind for the FTC, which is looking to groups like the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), for example, as a forum to discuss these issues.

Data has become the lifeblood for researchers and brands that want to understand peoples’ attributes and online behavior. And, if we don’t provide users with adequate control over their online privacy; government will. Let’s not let it get to that point.

Integrity-driven data

We’ve heard about the flap over Path uploading phone address books to its servers without first getting users’ permission, and how Google side-stepped privacy cookie settings to track users for ad serving. These glaring missteps have sadly cast a dark shadow over our entire industry and misrepresented how data is universally used. This type of conduct is bad for consumers and brands alike. If we don’t adequately regulate ourselves and address public privacy concerns in a more transparent, aggressive manner, it’s only a matter of time before our government imposes legislation. As we all know, government regulation could prove far more severe than if we were to take action on our own.
As an industry, the faster we progress towards heightened responsibility, the better. Consumers should not have to ask for greater control over the ways in which ads are targeted to them, but instead should be assured that privacy standards are high and consistent with the FTC’s principles. By implementing multiple solutions to ensure safe data handling, publishers and brands can promote accountability at every stage of interaction — from consumer notification to internal data management.

Dr. Drew Data Intervention

Now, here’s the good news. There are already several active organizations that are taking the appropriate steps on our behalf to provide a greater level of transparency and control to consumers. Leading the way are organizations such as the NAI, IAB, AAAAs, AAF, ANA, BBB, and DMA. These groups are making concerted efforts to protect businesses and consumers with legally-sound, self-regulatory programs. These organizations stand at the forefront of numerous privacy and educational initiatives, acting as both a global informants and full-service compliance platforms.

Lessons learned from our friends overseas

Political interventions on online advertising have already fundamentally changed the Internet user experience by prompting users to opt-out on every page, as seen in some European countries. Not only is it remarkably annoying, this new dynamic disrupts the natural online experience, but more importantly, it compels people to question whether they should navigate to the Web site of a smaller, less familiar publisher or brand. We could potentially be left with a homogenous Web, in which we default to browsing only on the sites of the largest companies. Doing so would undoubtedly cripple the efforts of smaller businesses and diverse information sources—to the detriment of our field that thrives on innovation, accessibility, and entrepreneurialism.

Data is a huge driver of our economy

Furthermore, we shouldn’t systematically dismantle one of the only industries that has successfully endured the tumultuous financial crisis and continues to keep many global economies afloat with its steady hiring streak.

According to IAB, digital advertising revenues in the United States were $7.88 billion for the third quarter of 2011, a 22 percent increase over the same period in 2010. Needless to say, innumerable jobs would be put on the line of fire—a risk that no one in 2012 wishes to take. In fact, few of us could stand where we are today if such a restrictive structure existed. Simply put, in our current economic climate, we literally and figuratively cannot afford to let advertising be 100% regulated by those who do not understand it as intimately as those who have built it.

Get your house in order

Whether you are a staunch supporter of consumer rights, universal access to free content, passionate about supporting our global economy, or all of the above, now is the time to put your privacy practices under a microscope.

Every digital advertiser and Big Data Architect should implement the highest level of privacy standards and publicly display the industry’s commitment to both privacy and growth of our increasingly innovative field. Now is the time to crawl out from under the rock and conduct ourselves with an unequivocal focus on consumer respect and privacy, alongside a fantastic online media experience. This issue is critical and timely; everything in our capacity must be done to meet consumer and governmental expectations.

By giving consumers greater control of their online privacy, we likewise ensure that we retain the right to flourish one of the fastest, most successful industries in history.

Image via Rob Pongsajapan/Flickr

Matt Arkin is the President of 33Across. Most recently, he served as Chief Revenue Officer for Sojern, and previously headed sales and operations at TACODA for three years.

We’re one step closer to widespread availability of self-driving cars — at least, if you live in Nevada.

The state passed regulations for self-driving cars today that were approved by insurance companies, car manufacturers, police, and others, reports Physorg. The biggest benefactor of the decision will be Google, which debuted its futuristic self-driving cars in late 2010 and lobbied for their use in Nevada last May.

“Self-driving cars have the potential to significantly increase driving safety,” a Google spokesperson said in a statement to VentureBeat. “We applaud Nevada for building a thoughtful framework to enable safe, ongoing testing of the technology and to anticipate the needs and best interests of Nevada citizens who may own vehicles with self-driving capabilities one day.”

Bruce Breslow, Nevada’s Department of Motor Vehicles director, says the DMV is now figuring out licensing procedures for testing the self-driving cars. The test cars will sport red license plates, Breslow said, while the general public will get green plates when the cars are available.

It’ll likely be a few years before normals folks can get their hands on self-driving cars, but Google previously hinted that they could perform tasks like serving as automated taxis and deliveries.

How good are Google’s self-driving cars? The company dropped a bombshell when it first announced their existence, saying the cars had covered 140,000 miles of driving in California with occasional human control. Seven cars drove over 1,000 miles without any human intervention at all. And that was back in late 2010, by now they’ve likely clocked many more miles on the road.

Thus far, there has only been one reported accident in the public with one of Google’s auto-driving cars, but that was entirely the fault of the less-sophisticated human behind the wheel. Google said in December that it received a patent for its driverless cars, but the company will still face competition from other car manufacturers.

Sebastian Thrun, the director of the Stanford Artificial Intelligence Laboratory and co-inventor of Google’s Street View service, previously said that the company’s goal is to prevent traffic accidents, give people more free time, and reduce carbon emissions by changing the way people use their cars.

Photo via Mac Morrison/Flickr