The National Journal’s Drew Clark reports that the Telecom Bill voted out of the House Commerce Committee last week won’t be headed to the floor this week after all. It seems that the Judiciary Committee has sought referral of the bill, meaning that Judiciary believes that it has some jurisidiction over the legislation and wants to review the bill before it hits the House floor.
Judiciary made clear last week that it is troubled by the bill’s net neutrality language and Clark says in his piece that some Republican leaders are worried about the impact a vote might have on the mid-term elections. They are worried that a vote against net neutrality regulations might become a political liability with voters.
Lobbyist Vin Weber, a former House member (R-MN), is quoted as saying “I would not like to cast a vote that can be portrayed by bloggers and others as a vote against the Internet.” (Yup, that’s just about the size of it — people really, really like their Internet the way it is. No matter what the truth is, it sounds scary to the uninitiated, and even to the initiated, to start talking about two tiers and fast lanes and what-not).
Judiciary Chairman James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) and ranking member John Conyers (D-MI) have purportedly drafted their own net neutrality language that is tougher than the provisions in the bill voted out of the Commerce Committee. The Sensenbrenner-Conyers bill is said to give authority to bring lawsuits over discriminatory Internet activities to DOJ, not the FCC.
Meanwhile, Ted Hearn at Multichannel News is reporting that the Senate bill is finally out from under wraps, and it’s a doozy. The 125-page bill, introduced by Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Stevens (R-AK) covers every topic, including cable franchising, rural phone subsidies, Internet network neutrality, sports programming and Internet piracy of digital-TV programming.
Regarding net neutrality, the Stevens bill would merely require the FCC to “study” the issue each year for the next five years. Co-chairman of the Committee Daniel Inouye (D-HI) is clearly not happy with the net neutrality provisions.
“We cannot ignore concerns about the potential for discrimination by network operators, but the draft appears to do just that by failing to create enforceable protections that will ensure network neutrality,” Inouye said in statement quoted by Hearn. “The legislation must promote the availability of affordable broadband services and extend consumer protections on a competitively neutral basis.”
More on the Senate bill later.
Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 9:44 PM | Print | Comments (0)
In a very interesting op-ed piece today in Canada’s National Post, Barenaked Ladies band member Steven Page takes on the record companies’ litigation campaign against file-sharers. Page and a number of his fellow Canadian musicians have formed the Canadian Music Creators Coalition to advance “three simple principles that should guide copyright reform and cultural policy.”
These principles are:
- First, we believe that suing our fans is destructive and hypocritical. We do not want to sue music fans, and we do not want to distort the law to coerce fans into conforming to a rigid digital market artificially constructed by the major labels. - Second, we believe that the use of digital locks, frequently referred to as technological protection measures, are risky and counterproductive. We do not support using digital locks to increase the labels’ control over the distribution, use and enjoyment of music, nor do we support laws that prohibit circumvention of such technological measures, including Canadian accession to the World Intellectual Property Organization’s Internet Treaties. These treaties are designed to give control to major labels and take choices away from artists and consumers. Laws should protect artists and consumers, not restrictive technologies. - Third, we strongly believe that cultural policy should support actual Canadian artists. We call on the Canadian government to firmly commit to programs that support Canadian music talent. The government should make a long-term commitment to grow support mechanisms such as the Canada Music Fund and FACTOR, invest in music training and education, create limited tax shelters for copyright royalties, protect artists from inequalities in bargaining power and make collecting societies more transparent.
Page asks for support from Industry Minister Maxime Bernier and Canadian Heritage Minister Bev Oda in making sure that copyright reform laws don’t head in a direction that Canadian musicians don’t like.
The “products of the mind” for which the record labels claim to seek protection are the products of our minds. The legislative proposals that would facilitate lawsuits against our fans or increase the labels’ control over the enjoyment of music are not made in our names.Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 3:22 PM | Print | Comments (0)
The political fight over net neutrality is kicking into high gear. A raft of groups, companies and coalitions have organized to promote the adoption of net neutrality regulations. Now broadband providers are responding with their own forum for countering these initiatives — netcompetition.org.
With the stated goal of providing “open, rigorous and illuminating” debate on the issue, a group of cable, phone and wireless companies, along with their trade associations, have funded the creation of netcompetition.org, which will launch tomorrow. In a bit of a twist, the companies and associations have recruited (or were recruited by) well-known policy and regulatory analyst Scott Cleland, head of the Precursor Group, to serve as the Chairman of netcompetition.org.
Netcompetition.org promises to “be a useful and substantive e-forum and resource for the latest ideas, positions, documents, comments, and developments on both sides of the debate.” Hmmm….if in fact that’s true, that netcompetition.org will indeed present both sides of the debate, kudos to the cable, phone and wireless industries. Most of the talk in this debate is driven by net neutrality proponents, with almost no one intelligently pointing out the very real dangers of government regulation. Phone companies, when they do discuss the topic, sound mean or silly and cable operators have been relatively silent on the subject.
If, however, netcompetition.org is simply a propaganda portal just like the sites of the pro-net neutrality folks (who at least don’t pretend to be objective), shame on the broadband folks for trying to pull a fast one. Let’s hope netcompetition.org isn’t messing with our minds by claiming to address both sides of the debate and by protecting itself with the reputation of an independent analyst, only to offer one-way views on the subject. We’ll find out tomorrow.
Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 2:30 PM | Print | Comments (0)
Napster, the company that got the whole online music ball rolling, is returning to its free music roots — in a way. The company announced today that it will offer at no charge to users any of the two million songs in its catalog.
But, unlike the Napster of yesteryear, this go-around Napster will allow users to listen to the songs a maximum of five times. After that, a per song charge of $.99, or monthly subscription charges, kick in.
Napster is clearly taking a different tack from mighty rival iTunes, which makes music available on a strictly premium basis. Moreover, Napster isn’t compatible with the ubiquitous iPod anyway.
The struggling online music service hopes to ride the rising Internet advertising wave by selling ads on this free service. Napster will cut the record companies in on a share of the ad revenue.
Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 1:37 PM | Print | Comments (1)The Denver Post has this article today on Comcast’s “family-friendly” tiers of video programming. Although the company denies that it did so as under political pressure from the FCC and “pro-family” interest groups, Comcast launched earlier this year a Family Tier which has 51 channels of programming include local broadcast and public access stations and children’s networks such as The Disney Channel and PBS Kids Sprout.
Now, however, those interest groups are complaining that the creation of this tier is not enough — they want Comcast to more aggressively market it. Jeez…I dunno. The article quotes researcher Bruce Leichtman who says there’s just little demand for these tiers.
Bruce Leichtman, president and principal analyst for Leichtman Research Group, says there isn’t a demand for family packages and that marketing such a product makes “little business sense” for cable companies. “Study after study shows that people want more. There’s not a groundswell of demand for this (family tiers),” he said “It’s coming from a vocal minority that’s backed by the government. They’re being forced to do this.”Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 1:18 PM | Print | Comments (0)
With neigborhood Starbucks stores serving as caffeinated town-squares, it just makes sense that entertainment companies are turning to the ubiquitous coffee houses as marketing partners. The LA Times’ Sharon Waxman has this piece today about the coffee giant’s deal awith the William Morris Agency to find movie and book projects to market. Moreover, Starbucks’ small entertainment group is moving from the company’s Seattle headquarters to Santa Monica to get closer to the movie biz action.
Starbucks has already had great success in helping to promote music in its outlets (some would say too much success given the not-low-volume hawking of music in most Starbucks outlets). The chain also recently promoted a Lionsgate movie called “Akeelah and the Bee,” which opened eighth last weekend despite Starbucks involvement. (However, that’s not stopping the studios from jumping on a good thing when they see it.)
While Starbucks’ new-found Hollywood-ways will no doubt make its stores slightly less…well, comforting, at least the company claims it will promote only high-quality fare.
“We’re looking for quality, and substance,” he [Starbucks Chairman Howard Schultz] said. “We want to see our name associated with the kind of music, literature and movies that people will say, ‘I’m glad Starbucks brought this to the marketplace.’ ” He gave “Crash” as an example of the kind of movie that Starbucks might promote. The film, which was about racial tension and also was from Lionsgate, was a sleeper hit at the box office and went on to win an Oscar for best picture this year.Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 12:38 PM | Print | Comments (0)
In continued consolidation in the telecom sector, long haul carrier Level 3 is expected to announce today that it is buying Canonsburg, PA-based data transmission provider TelCove for $1 billion, according to this scoop by the Wall Street Journal. The deal calls for a payment by Level 3 of $445 million in cash, $637 million in stock plus the assumption of $156 million in debt.
The TelCove buy is the latest in a string of acquisitions for Level 3 — the company earlier snatched up WilTel Communications Group, Progress Telecom and ICG Communications. TelCove started life as Adelphia Business Solutions, an arm of formerly scandal-ridden and now bankrupt cable company Adelphia Communications.
Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 6:47 AM | Print | Comments (0)
Blogs We Read
