To the dismay of pundits, bloggers, paid lobbyists and policy agitators, the FCC failed to throw gasoline on the 700 MHz fire today by adopting rules for the upcoming spectrum auction that reflect a compromise position on the issue of open access. The Commission’s new rules, as articulated in press release form only (the full text won’t be out for weeks), now include two of the four conditions of open access demanded by Google and public interest groups but reviled by the incumbent wireless carriers.
Licensees in the 22 MHz “C block” group of the spectrum, the big commercial services block, will have to guarantee that not only will different handsets work in that spectrum but that they also won’t block third-party applications. The draft rules floated by FCC Chairman Kevin Martin originally called for only open access in terms of device interoperability.
Moreover, the rules also apparently contain meaningful enforcement provisions that come into play if a licensee tries to evade these requirements. The rules apparently contain remedies that consumers can easily pursue if they believe the licenses are messing with their handsets or services. In addition, the FCC seemingly puts the onus on the licensees (and not consumers) to prove that they are indeed complying with the open access requirements.
The rules do not, however, require that the licensees make available any of the spectrum on a wholesale basis to third party providers, a requirement sought by Google and the public interest groups as a means of ensuring a truly neutral wireless broadband platform. That’s why Google, although begrudgingly pleased with today’s decision, says that the new rules could have been “a more complete victory for consumers.”
Gigi Sohn of Public Knowledge also contends that the new rules are close but no cigar. The failure to mandate a wholesale access requirement is “a tremendous missed opportunity,” she said in a statement. Still, Sohn praises Kevin Martin for sticking his neck out. “He does deserve credit for inviting the ire of both the telephone companies and many of his fellow Republicans.”
In terms of fellow Republicans, not only were some key Republican congressional leaders pushing for the removal of all open access requirements, but Martin’s fellow Republican commissioner Robert McDowell also issued a vitriolic partial dissent on the decision, railing against the “large wealthy corporations” who favor open access. McDowell claims he’s standing up for all the little guys (as if little guys have the billions needed to bid on the spectrum.)
If Google and the public interest groups aren’t entirely happy with the decision, neither are the incumbent wireless carriers. Steve Largent, head of CTIA, which represents AT&T, Verizon Wireless and the other major mobile providers, said in a statement that “we are disappointed that a significant portion of this valuable spectrum will be encumbered with mandates that could significantly reduce the number of interested bidders.”
The question now remains: will the inclusion of these requirements actually discourage bidders for the spectrum? Google, which had committed to paying the $4.6 billion reserve price for the spectrum if the FCC would have agreed to the initial four principles, may still be a bidder despite the half-way measure.
During a press call hosted by Public Knowledge, Google Washington Telecom and Media Counsel Rick Whitt wouldn’t actually commit to Google’s continued participation in the auction, noting that the devil is in the details. Google wants to wait for the full text of the FCC’s order before deciding. But he did say that Google’s promise to pony up the $4.6 billion wasn’t ever a take-it-or-leave-it proposition. (Actually, what he said, in classic Washington/legal style, was: “We did not state we would not bid if not all four conditions were adopted.”)
Let’s hope that CTIA and the incumbent carriers are wrong when they say the open access conditions will discourage bidding. Another part of today’s decision stipulates that if the $4.6 billion reserve isn’t met, the open access conditions will be lifted and the spectrum will be re-auctioned without them.
However it all works out, no one seems to be 100% satisfied by today’s decision. One side says that the FCC didn’t go far enough and the other side says the FCC went too far. Neither side, however, seems ready to continue a major battle over the issue, an outcome that was all but guaranteed if the FCC had failed to expand the open access requirements, or, in the alternative, had given Google everything it wanted. That’s political compromise, which makes for good decision-making but bad political theater.
Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 5:00 PM | Print | Comments (0)Two articles today underscore the sometimes scary nature of the Internet. The first is a surprisingly long USA Today re-hash of the debate that cropped up earlier this year regarding the ubiquity of hateful, threatening or rude comments and web posts. My favorite part is this made-for-soundbite quote from Paul Saffo: “The information superhighway has become the mean streets of cyburbia.”
My second favorite part: Tim O’Reilly, who caused a firestorm by suggesting that bloggers abide by a code of ethics, is now working on a technology that enables readers to participate in moderating comments. O’Reilly spokeswoman Sara Winge spoke some very true words when she said “We think that’s more likely to get widely adopted than a written code that requires agreement from bloggers.”
The other scary article comes from The Washington Post’s Sam Diaz, who profiles the efforts by law enforcement authorities and private groups to patrol social networking sites such as Facebook and MySpace in an effort to weed out child predators.
That’s not the really scary part. What’s kind of upsetting is the amount of personal detail (including first names, photos and cell phone numbers) that teens post about themselves on these sites.
Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 11:29 AM | Print | Comments (0)
A new web-based video service has launched called My Damn Channel and like Funnyordie, a web video destination backed by Will Ferrell, it’s a site aimed at allowing entertaiment artists to do their own thing.
Former CBS Radio and MTV executive Rob Barnett has lined up some Hollywood names, including Harry Shearer, Andy Milonakis and Paul Reiser, to participate in the venture which gives “artists 100% creative control to develop their own brands and new storylines.”
In an interesting riff, one of the videos is a parody of “The Landlord” video hit on Funnyordie, which shows Pearl the landlord in the year 2027, capped by a bizarre musical theater number, presumably constructed just to show that “creative control” is precisely that — anything the artist wants to do.
Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 10:05 AM | Print | Comments (0)
In a move that seems like a great model of public and private cooperation, the National Archives and Amazon.com have reached a pact under which Amazon will sell films and video footage gathering dust in the archives’ vaults. These videos and films, which capture some of our most intriguing and important moments in history, are already available at no charge to folks who want to visit the archives’ facilities in College Park, MD, but now they’ll become available to anybody via the Internet. And the government has a back-up preservationist for cost-to-maintain material.
Amazon will make these videos available on a custom-order basis through a subsidiary called CustomFlix. Selected portions of the Archives’ footage, newsreels from the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s, are already for sale at Amazon for $19.99 each.
Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 9:31 AM | Print | Comments (0)
Blogs We Read
