Recently in FCC Category

CircleID takes a look at America's Broadband Score

"Leonard Waverman, the dean of the Haskayne School of Business at the University of Calgary, describe a measure he developed called the 'Connectivity Scorecard.' It's meant to compare countries on the extent that consumers, businesses and government put communication technology to economically productive use. Even after deducting the untold unproductive hours spent on Facebook and YouTube, the United States comes out on top..."

What's interesting to me is the comments. How no one can find the US Broadband score is funny. (Heard of Google much?) It isn't so much the score as what the score represents.

We have a few problems to fix:

(1) ISP Competition for one. Many places only have one choice for broadband. Many have two - cable or telco. Few have three. It makes download caps and Net Neutrality a hot button that true competition would eliminate. (And please don't give me that 3G is the third rail because guess who owns that - Ma and Pa Bell in the majority just like they own the Internet backbone and the PSTN structure in more than 70% of the country).

(2) A definition of broadband. Is it 256k one way as the FCC has defined it for years? Is it now the new FCC definition of 768k? Or is it 1M x 1M minimum? Or is it 100Mbps? This would certainly help.

(3) Deployment versus Penetration. "When you look at the 2008 ITIF Broadband Rankings report ...the U.S. ranked 15th among industrial nations at a composite score of 10.25. The U.S. is reported to have an average download speed of 4.9 Mbps, which is a far distant behind Japan's 63.6 Mbps. In addition, the report states that the US broadband penetration comes in at 0.57%." [source] Here's the detail: "Composite Score: Each nation's overall score is the sum of its standard deviation score for each of the three indicators: Household penetration or subscribers per household, average download speed in Mbps and price at the lowest monthly cost per Mbps." 

We may have "broadband" deployed in a large swath of America, but the speed is low compared to other countries. Because we are a suburban and rural country, it takes more infrastructure to hit everywhere with broadband, especially very high-speed Internet Access (greater than 3Mbps). And because most places hit are single family homes - we do live in suburban sprawl consisting of McMansions filled with Yuppies and 2.2 kids - it also affects our score at the ITIF.  According to a CWA study, the speed in the US is just over 2Mbps.

(4) Cost! We probably pay more per MB than any other G8 country. We get less speed and pay more for it. That hurts us. Surprisedly, in Wilson NC, the Muni fiber sells 100MB symmetric while TWCable and Embarq just gape at the speed and price. Well, not gape, so much as sue that it's unfair that a city would provide services it refuses to.

So we have cost, penetration, subscriber per household (density), and speed. Can't do much about density, but you can improve speed and cost. Also, there is a Digital Divide in America. Poorer families do not have computers, so do not have a need (or a budget) to buy broadband. It poses a problem that funding broadband for libraries and schools is supposed to throw a rope at. The Pew Report reflects this chasm.

BTW, the Connectivity Scorecard study has been analyzed here and by my favorite snarky blog, TechDirt.

AT&T is back together. The Telecom Act of 1996 has largely been a wipe-out. We have a Duopoly and we have seen more than trillion dollars spent on networks without wiring most homes with fiber - and way less businesses with fiber access. Imagine that.  (Let's not even talk about the Digital TV (DTV) Transition mess. Luckily, that day wasn't SuperBowl Saturday).

Copps is the acting FCC chief and he has started to clean house of Martin cronies. (Change is in the Air at the FCC). Copps also stated that he wouldn't do much in the interim to allow the new Chair an open slate.  But Copps can sit on his hands because the DTV is coming and Congress is getting involved. (That won't be good). There are Net Neutrality issues that are integrated with Network Management policies to examine, like with Cox and Comcast. And probably with Verizon's use of its own CDN. 

Let's not even talk about the big issues like data collection, white spaces spectrum, Universal Service Slush fund (USF, e-Rate), Inter-Carrier Compensation, and Numbering with Portability.  Heavy issues to be addressed. Julius Genachowski has even been put up for vetting yet

Julius Genachowski will be Obama's nominee for the FCC. For 9 reasons that he might be the right guy, see Fred Wilson's blog.

If you can't get a position at the FCC, perhaps you can put your talents to use at the other governmental telecom agency, which is looking for a few intelligient people like Sue Crawford help shape the broadband policy of the US:

The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) is seeking nominations of individuals to represent the business community, public interest groups, and other appropriate groups interested in serving on the NTIA Online Safety and Technology Working Group (OSTWG) for a single fifteen (15) month term to commence in January 2009. At the conclusion of the working group's term, the OSTWG will provide a report to the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information and NTIA Administrator and to Congress on ways to promote and to preserve a safe environment for children using the Internet.

DATES: Nominations must be postmarked or electronically transmitted on or before December 12, 2008.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 10, 2008, the President signed into law the ''Broadband Data Improvement Act'' (the Act), Pub. L. No. 110-385. Section 214 of that Act directs NTIA to establish the OSTWG to review and evaluate:  READ here...

Who is Sue Crawford? Read her bio here. Besides being a law professor, she is on the board of ICANN. Her writings are very articulate and logical - until the ramblings you read from me. I understand that she is part of the Obama transition team, but I can't confirm that.

I don't know how this ended up in front of me this morning, but it was an interesting piece about Obama and Radio Localism. Obviously, conservatives don't want localism because it gets in the way of profit. You can't profit if you have to pay a DJ in each market AND report some local news. Sheesh! Why do you think we get these licenses anyway - Profit. The guys at NAB are ready to fight Localism.

Unfortunately for NAB, word is getting out that license renewal is NOT automatic and even one complaint can derail the process and cost you money. (This was news to me). And during the media ownership workshops, despite broadcasters trying to fill seats, too many folks showed up to report about the total lack of local news in their communities. Even though Martin had a pre-determined gift for NAB, the workshops were too powerful to allow the steamroller to work.

NAB needs to realize that the FCC's job is not to insure that some businesses have a profit or even stay in business. The FCC's main duty is to protect the consumer and to mandate the spectrum equitably.  (Congress needs to remember this as well).  If TBO.com companies started going backrupt, I am certain that another entity would take its place.

AT&T is testing broadband caps in Nevada. First, cable now Ma Bell. In both cases, the reason may have to do preserving TV revenue than anything. There is concern. It even popped up as a LinkedIn question.

DSL Prime is outraged over the cap and has a different view of what it means. (See here)

This is just further proof that duopoly competition doesn't work. The TIA is begging Congress for a Broadband Stimulus bill that they say will generate $1B in economic growth. Meanwhile, WISPA lobbied for a license-lite proposal for the "white spaces" spectrum, which was granted. WISPA members (mainly wireless ISPs) wouldn't mind some largesse from the government either to build out more towers and wireless links to actually bring broadband to places without it (you know, crossing the Digital Divide) -- or to offer a third pipe. (The Clearwire-Sprint-Nextel merger was approved today as well, but that company is funded to the tune of billions. Give th

The FCC voted today too. They took the Inter-Carrier Compensation and USF off the agenda, much to Martin's dismay.

"Federal regulators have approved a plan to open up unused, unlicensed portions of the television airwaves known as "white spaces" to deliver wireless broadband service." [Y! news] [fcc.gov]

FCC approved, with conditions, the mergers of Sprint-Nextel/Clearwire and  Alltel-Verizon. [fcc.gov]

FCC opened an investigation into the pricing policies of major cable operators and Verizon. "The agency wants to ensure the companies' customers are getting treated fairly, FCC Chairman Kevin Martin said in an interview with The Associated Press." [Y! news]

The Federal Communications Commission issued regulations this week for voice-over-IP service providers to offer Enhanced 911 emergency call services to all customers. The rules were required under the New and Emerging Technologies 911 Improvement Act of 2008, which was signed into law in July.

DUTIES.--It shall be the duty of each IP-enabled voice service provider to provide 9-1-1 service and enhanced 9-1-1 service to its subscribers in accordance with the requirements of the Federal Communications Commission, as in effect on the date of enactment of the New and Emerging Technologies 911 Improvement Act of 2008 and as such requirements may be modified by the Commission from time to time.

Washington, D.C. - October 27, 2008 - Many Americans, especially those living in rural areas have never had affordable broadband Internet access.  In a letter filed with the FCC last week, WISPA, the Wireless Internet Service Providers Association (www.wispa.org), showed the FCC how it can make valuable TV White Space spectrum available for new services.  The FCC is scheduled to vote on November 4 on how this spectrum can be used after the DTV transition occurs in February 2009.

WISPA offered a detailed "licensed-lite" solution for unused TV channels.  Unlike expensive spectrum auctions and "noisy" unlicensed spectrum, the "licensed-lite" approach relies on a spectrum sharing system that enables all users to operate without interference.  It would benefit the public by allowing the development of new and innovative types of unlicensed broadband devices and services.  It would also benefit WISPs by improving the service range of their existing networks, thereby allowing WISPs to reach new customers.  WISPA's proposal also ensures that consumers will continue to receive over-the-air television signals without interference.

Rick Harnish, WISPA's President, said "We believe adoption of our "licensed-lite" proposal will stimulate rural economies around the nation by enabling low cost ubiquitous broadband service from local and regional operators.  Children growing up in small towns deserve the same opportunities created by broadband adoption as those children in metropolitan areas.  Small businesses and rural entrepreneurs are the lifeblood of a growing economy and we encourage the FCC Commissioners to do their part in reviving Rural America."

Jack Unger, WISPA Secretary and Chair of WISPA's FCC Committee, added, "We believe that there are enough White Space frequencies for all wireless users to share, without creating interference. Our "licensed-lite" proposal adopts a "common-ground" approach that benefits all users without relying on controversial "spectrum-sensing" techniques.  Our technical solution uses a geolocation database that makes frequency sharing work. We urge the FCC Commissioners to adopt our "licensed-lite" proposal at their November 4th meeting because we believe it truly represents a "win-win" solution for all parties."

Since 2004, over 30,000 comments have been filed with the FCC suggesting how the White Space frequencies should be used.  Broadcasters want to be sure that new White Space users will not create interference with television reception.  Silicon Valley firms favor unlicensed use for personal/portable devices that would rely on the controversial "sensing" technologies opposed by broadcasters.  WISPA's "licensed-lite" approach represents a middle-of-the road solution that accommodates all of these interests.

[The ex-parte  notice is here]

FOR MORE INFORMATION - CONTACT:

• Jack Unger, Chair WISPA FCC Committee  818-227-4220
• Stephen Coran, Principal, Rini Coran, PC  202-463-4310

More on the issue here.

The FCC is holding a meeting on Nov. 4. On the agenda: Inter-Carrier Compensation, Alltel-VZ merger, Clearwire-Sprint merger, and a vote of White Spaces. Lots of heavy lifting on this agenda. Martin wants to give his pals at VZ one more gift before he goes.

The VZ-Alltel merger is big, but the topic that can really rock telecom is the Inter-carrier Comp issue, which has been a stagnant FCC docket for years.

If companies can show high costs, they will continue to benefit from the subsidy program. Martin also wants to eliminate wireless providers' right to claim government subsidies for offering service in hard-to-reach areas. Martin wants all companies, wireless included, to show they have incurred losses in providing rural service before they can collect the subsidy. Without those changes, Martin worries that the subsidy fund will collapse of its own weight and rates will go up anyhow. [CNN]

It depends want the Compromise looks like -- and it will be a large compromise. Democrats want one thing. Republicans another. Cellcos versus Wireline. Rural versus Urban. Inter-Carrier Comp even bleeds into the USF issue. How? Because rural carriers count on both Universal Service Fund subsidies AND rather high call termination charges to keep afloat.

Why now? The ISP inter-carrier comp rule has been in court for six years. Earlier this year, the DC Court ruled that the FCC had to get off the pot:

The court set the deadline for an order from the FCC at November 5, 2008, six months from the date of oral argument, stated it will not grant an extension and warned that if an appropriate order is not timely issued, it will vacate the interim inter-carrier compensation rules.

Consumer groups are against another largess for the monopolies at the expense of the ratepayers.

The head of the Federal Communications Commission wants a massive overhaul of the fees that phone companies pay each other when they connect calls. Supporters say the reforms will help fund improved broadband Internet access for rural America, but consumer advocates question how much the plan will raise people's phone bills. "This could be potentially a billion-dollar giveaway to phone monopolies, paid for out of consumers' pocketbooks," said Chris Murray, an attorney with Consumers Union. [AP]

Intercarrier comp is how the various phone companies pay each other for traffic. VoIP providers and cellular carriers, especially Sprint, would like a fairer shake. The old RBOCs would like the Rural LEC's to stop getting so much money. (see Free Conference services not getting paid by RBOCs).

The National Telecommunications Cooperative Association, which represents small phone carriers, told FCC officials earlier this month that a new rate of $0.0007 per minute puts many of their members' livelihoods at risk.

And then there is the White Spaces issue. When broadcasters make the DTV transition in 1Q09, there will be unused spectrum that the Wireless World would like to use for its own bandwidth needs. However, due to bleed over (interference) with cordless microphones and other broadcasting devices, the NAB is opposed. [see dailywireless]

All of this is at one meeting while America votes.