Unsurprisingly, major telecom providers like AT&T and Verizon aren’t big on having to compete with the government for customers who don’t actually need the overpriced services being offered by their companies. Some GOP members have suggested that it would be more fiscally responsible for the FCC to sell the broadcast spectrum, allowing the government to raise billions in new revenue. What say you, dear reader? source
Today’s action demonstrates that compliance with FCC obligations is not optional. 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.FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski • Regarding an FCC ruling that basically prevents Verizon from charging money for its 4G wi-fi tethering services — a big victory for people who feel like they’re getting screwed by their phone provider. Why’s that? The 4G network was set up to be open and pro-consumer, with cell phone companies having limited influence on how their customers can use it. Verizon Wireless will also voluntarily make a $1.25 million payment to the Treasury to settle the issue.
A win for the entertainment industry: The fines were a result of three separate incidents, spread across multiple years and two broadcast networks. The Court tossed three fines from two separate networks on Thursday, in a narrow decision which could have had wide implications for the entertainment industry, but probably won’t due to the way it was decided. Here are the indecency fines the networks were fighting against:
» But wait a second: Before you start celebrating the new era of guns and porn during prime-time television, know that the Supreme Court has not stripped the FCC of its ability to regulate broadcasters. In fact, they vacated a lower court’s decision to rule the so-called “indecency rule” unconstitutional; however, the justices did not believe that the organization provided “fair warning” to Fox and ABC that their respective broadcasts could result in fines. (Photo via Bloomberg)
If Comcast is violating the administration’s orders, it should face significant penalties so consumers know they can count on the administration to protect it from anticompetitive conduct.Senator Al Franken • In a statement, after sending a letter to the FCC and Department of Justice, requesting an investigation of possible violations of the conditions that Comcast agreed to when the company merged with NBC last year. “When the Obama administration signed off on Comcast’s merger with NBC Universal, it laid out a set of rules to prevent Comcast from squashing its competitors,” added Franken. Comcast has denied allegations of wrongdoing, saying that its On Demand service is subject to cable rules, but not internet regulations. source (via • follow)
FCC announces creation of mobility fund: In a press release Friday morning, the FCC reaffirmed its commitment to increasing broadband and mobile coverage in rural areas. The agency announced the creation of a new Mobility Fund, a new addition to the Connect America Fund, created to “accelerate our nation’s ongoing efforts to close gaps in mobile wireless service.” Included in the press release was a reminder that the agency will soon host a $300 million reverse auction, with the winner receiving $300 million to provide rural broadband coverage. They also revealed an interactive map of the nation’s worst coverage areas, created with online map-making tool MapBox. source
On behalf of American consumers, we’re concerned about Verizon’s actions and are looking into the matter.The FCC, in a statement saying they’ll look into Verizon’s controversial new $2 bill-pay convenience fee. 2011 has not been a good year for nickel-and-dimers — between Bank of America and Ticketmaster, “convenience charges” are starting to look like something consumers will not stand for, and will complain about loudly on the internet. On a side note, Change.org has had a bit of a banner year.
“The actions by the Federal Communications Commission and the Department of Justice to block this transaction do not change the realities of the U.S. wireless industry. It is one of the most fiercely competitive industries in the world, with a mounting need for more spectrum that has not diminished and must be addressed immediately. The AT&T and T-Mobile USA combination would have offered an interim solution to this spectrum shortage. In the absence of such steps, customers will be harmed and needed investment will be stifled.”
The company will take a $4 billion charge for backing out on the deal. Consumers win.
But the companies’ ambitions must be scaled back if they want any chance at a deal, analysts say. To address the objections of the Justice Department and F.C.C. that a merger would be anticompetitive, AT&T could agree to sell off 40 percent or so T-Mobile’s assets to wireless rivals, they say.
The policy goal, analysts say, would be to strengthen wireless competitors beyond the big two, Verizon Wireless and AT&T. So sales of mobile spectrum, cell towers and customers could not be made to Verizon, but to others, like Sprint and MetroPCS, the third- and fifth-largest carriers.
We’re sure Cricket would love to become a bigger player in the market.
I’m moving back to New York in a few days. Unlike past...
OMG. I got so...
In this week’s Newsweek, a little...
Tumblr this morning. [h/t anne]
#@#$%!.tumblr.com
Here’s a hidden feature that shipped in...
Watch: PCB gets a visual shout out on GMA’s Yahoo/Tumblr...
From the WSJ:
Federal regulators will propose removing the “Fairness Doctrine,” a controversial, if little used, regulation on political speech from the books this week, the Federal Communications Commission said Monday.
The Fairness Doctrine, which has been around since 1949, required licensed broadcasters to give equal time to differing political views. The rule was introduced during an era in which there were far fewer media outlets and regulators wanted to ensure that listeners had access to both sides of political debate.
The FCC abandoned the policy in 1987 during the Reagan administration, saying it violated broadcasters’ free speech rights, but the regulation remained on the books.
Read more.
Even though it hasn’t been in wide use since the days of “Charles in Charge” (when Scott Baio had to give equal time to Willie Aames) it’s still sad to see it suffer such a fate.
The largest land-line and mobile phone provider in the United States sent 1,500 Georgetown Cupcakes to the headquarters of the Federal Communications Commission, the New York Times reported over the weekend.
“Operation Cupcake” came at a time when the FCC debated whether or not internet service providers should be subject to so-called “net neutrality” regulations last December.
The Times reports the cupcakes were also dropped off at a time when AT&T was wooing competitor T-Mobile into a $39 billion cash-and-stock buyout.
The watchdog group Public Knowledge said the cupcakes cost about $3,700 before delivery charges. [TBD.com]
Beautiful. Way to sweeten them up, AT&T.
This would harm investment, stifle innovation, and lead to job losses. As Americans become more aware of what’s happening here, I suspect many will be as alarmed as I am at the government’s intrusion.Senate Minority Leader Mitch “I don’t know what the hell I’m talking about” McConnell • Talking about net neutrality, which proves that he doesn’t know what the hell he’s talking about. If only Ted Stevens were still alive to remind Mitch that the ‘net is a series of tubes. What happens to your own personal Internet when an obstructionist jerk like McConnell tries to favor large corporations over consumers? It won’t be like a dump truck. It’ll be like your own busted series of tubes that you’re paying out of the wazoo for. All because McConnell wants you to think that all government regulation is bad, even when it’s not bad. While this net neutrality policy is kinda weaksauce, it’s better than letting AT&T and Comcast regulate usage. source (via • follow)
Copyright 2009-2013 Ernie Smith • Ask us stuff! • E-mail us • Follow us on Twitter • Follow us on Facebook
