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)
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
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.
Every time and in every way that the telecommunications careers have had power or control, we the people wind up getting screwed. Every audience that I speak this statement and phrase to bursts into applause.Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak • Offering up his take on the whole net neutrality battle, an argument he explains in great detail by noting how he, being the inventive guy he is, has run up against the big telecommunications companies multiple times in his life, first with his dial-a-joke service (which he had to stop because the cost proved to be way too expensive), and then, years later, with his nice-guy attempt to wire up his entire neighborhood with free cable access (no, really). The Woz’s main argument in this case? “Local ISP’s should provide connection to the Internet but then it should be treated as though you own those wires and can choose what to do with them when and how you want to,” he writes, “as long as you don’t destruct them.” That’s something that a lot of people can certainly get behind, for sure. source (via • follow)
Copyright 2009-2013 Ernie Smith • Ask us stuff! • E-mail us • Follow us on Twitter • Follow us on Facebook
