December 20, 2011 (Everywhere AT&T loses, Verizon wins)

BENTON'S COMMUNICATIONS-RELATED HEADLINES for TUESDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2011

AT&T/T-MOBILE
   AT&T Ends Bid To Add Network Capacity Through T-Mobile USA Purchase - press release
   Activist Groups: Ding-Dong, the AT&T–T-Mobile Deal Is Dead
   What’s Next for T-Mobile?
   What Does AT&T Dropping T-Mobile Deal Mean for Customers? - analysis
   Regulators React to AT&T/T-Mobile
   Surrender by AT&T is victory for consumers and regulators - editorial
   Sprint Wins the Argument, but It’s Still Losing the War - analysis
   No Justice for Cellphone Users - editorial
   Deutsche Telekom slams US regulators
   Deutsche Telekom $3 Billion Fee Buys T-Mobile Time - analysis
   AT&T Left With Few Options After T-Mobile Bid - analysis
   Merger aftermath: Everywhere AT&T loses, Verizon wins - analysis
   Despite AT&T’s defeat, wireless deals will continue - analysis

MORE SPECTRUM/WIRELESS
   SpectrumCo Asks FCC to Transfer Spectrum Licenses to Verizon
   While T-Mobile eludes AT&T, Verizon buys up spectrum - analysis
   The Top 10 Ways Mobile Carriers Tried to Screw Us in 2011
   Smartphone Winners And Losers This Holiday Season -- And In 2012 [links to web]
   Yo Amazon: Please don’t hijack the web on Kindle Fire
   How Siri could help boost location-based services
   NTSB chief backs cellphone ban in cars even if policy is ‘not popular with folks’ [links to web]
   LightSquared running out of cash [links to web]
   Is Verizon Wireless illegally blocking Google Wallet? It’s time for the FCC to investigate
   Want Google Wallet? No need to root your Galaxy Nexus [links to web]
   App Internet and mobile devices to drive massive technology demands in 2012 [links to web]

OWNERSHIP
   Apple wins small victory over HTC in smartphone patent battle
   Sens Herb Kohl and Mike Lee call for Google antitrust probe
   BT sues Google over Android
   Sprint Sues Comcast, TWC, Cox And Cable One Over VoIP Patents
   Princely Value for Twitter

CONTENT
   Don't Break the Internet - analysis
   Sponsors of SOPA Act Pulled in 4 Times as Much in Contributions from Hollywood as from Silicon Valley - research
   Friends & Frenemies: Why We Add and Remove Facebook Friends [links to web]
   The Law of Online Sharing

TELEVISION
   What should TV stations do with all that negative ad money? - op-ed
   APTS Praises Washington for Preserving Noncommercial TV Funding [links to web]

INTERNET
   Misunderstanding Race and the Digital Divide - op-ed
   Level 3's Role in the $46.6 million ARRA-funded California Central Valley Broadband Project - press release [links to web]
   New Internet Names Feared, Loathed By All [links to web]

LABOR
   CWA Report: Outsourced call centers pose serious security threat

ADVERTISING
   Verizon, Cablevision Settle Suit Over Internet-Speed Ads
   Trust Me: Here's Why Brands Sell Trust, Subconsciously [links to web]

FCC REFORM
   Proposed FCC 'reform' could temper its bite - analysis

POLICYMAKERS
   Sponsors of SOPA Act Pulled in 4 Times as Much in Contributions from Hollywood as from Silicon Valley - research
   Schulzrinne named FCC CTO
   Minority Media & Telecommunications Council Names New Chair

GOVERNMENT & COMMUNICATIONS
   Beijing Tightens Cyber Controls
   India's Techies Angered Over Internet Censorship Plan
   US Considers Combating Somali Militants’ Twitter Use [links to web]
   Lawmakers want to include holiday greetings in mail to constituents [links to web]
   Only half of dot-gov sites are active, GSA reports [links to web]
   Rep. Darrell Issa's Big Plans For Digitizing Democracy [links to web]

MORE ONLINE
   IBM predicts 5 tech changes in 5 years [links to web]
   Facebook’s New Menlo Park Home [links to web]
   Proof that supercomputers can see and build the future [links to web]
   The Coming War for the Social Workplace [links to web]
   Code for America: An elegant solution for government IT problems [links to web]

back to top

AT&T/T-MOBILE

AT&T ENDS PURSUIT OF T-MOBILE
[SOURCE: AT&T, AUTHOR: Press release]
After a thorough review of options, AT&T has agreed with Deutsche Telekom AG to end its bid to acquire T-Mobile USA, which began in March 2011.
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.
“AT&T will continue to be aggressive in leading the mobile Internet revolution,” said Randall Stephenson, AT&T chairman and CEO. “Over the past four years we have invested more in our networks than any other U.S. company. As a result, today we deliver best-in-class mobile broadband speeds – connecting smartphones, tablets and emerging devices at a record pace – and we are well under way with our nationwide 4G LTE deployment. To meet the needs of our customers, we will continue to invest. However, adding capacity to meet these needs will require policymakers to do two things. First, in the near term, they should allow the free markets to work so that additional spectrum is available to meet the immediate needs of the U.S. wireless industry, including expeditiously approving our acquisition of unused Qualcomm spectrum currently pending before the FCC. Second, policymakers should enact legislation to meet our nation’s longer-term spectrum needs. The mobile Internet is a dynamic industry that can be a critical driver in restoring American economic growth and job creation, but only if companies are allowed to react quickly to customer needs and market forces.”
To reflect the break-up considerations due Deutsche Telekom, AT&T will recognize a pretax accounting charge of $4 billion in the 4th quarter of 2011. Additionally, AT&T will enter a mutually beneficial roaming agreement with Deutsche Telekom.
benton.org/node/107449 | AT&T
Recommend this Headline
back to top

REACTION TO AT&T ANNOUNCEMENT
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
"AT&T officially surrenders," said the headline of one e-mail. "AT&T Finally Abandons Doomed Merger," said another. "We are thankful that the proposed AT&T and T-Mobile merger is now officially dead," said another.
"This deal has been as good as dead for months because the facts never matched AT&T's fabrications about the benefits of the merger," said Free Press President Craig Aaron. "As the public, the Justice Department and the FCC long ago recognized -- and now even AT&T must admit -- this deal would have only meant higher prices, fewer choices and tens of thousands of lost American jobs. Good riddance. The Obama administration deserves praise and credit for standing up to AT&T's relentless lobbying and propaganda."
The National Hispanic Media Coalition celebrated the news. "The combination of AT&T and T-Mobile would have left two wireless carriers with nearly 80% of the mobile phone market, leading to less competition, higher prices, and fewer choices for mobile phone customers. It would have also led to job losses."
"In this age of cynicism, it is important for the American people to see that Washington does not always go to the highest bidder," said Public Knowledge legal director Harold Feld. "The Department of Justice and the Federal Communications Commission stood up to tremendous lobbying pressure as AT&T spent tens of millions of dollars trying to push this merger through. We hope that AT&T and T-Mobile will focus on deploying the best, most competitive networks possible rather than trying to merge to duopoly. These businesses are fundamentally sound, and have what it takes to bring broadband and jobs to America on their own. We look forward to seeing them re-imagine what's possible, rather than trying to rule the air."
benton.org/node/107461 | Broadcasting&Cable
Recommend this Headline
back to top

WHAT’S NEXT FOR T-MOBILE?
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Brian Chen]
The decision to end AT&T’s attempt to buy T-Mobile comes as a devastating blow to T-Mobile, which has seen steep declines in market share while its rivals AT&T, Verizon Wireless and Sprint won customers with popular devices like the iPhone and Android phones, said Tero Kuittinen, an independent analyst that has followed the telecom industry for years. Now that the merger has failed, it’s unlikely T-Mobile could court Verizon or Sprint as potential suitors because they use completely different cellphone technologies to service their phones, Kuittinen said. He said that T-Mobile must now explore more creative opportunities — for instance, seeking partnerships with media giants like Amazon, Facebook or Google. T-Mobile’s spectrum, not its customer base, is its most valuable asset. “T-Mobile is probably going to be profoundly damaged by this,” Kuittinen said. “They should have done some strategic rethinking instead of chasing this mirage, this dream of a merger. Now they’ve lost a lot of time.”
benton.org/node/107480 | New York Times
Recommend this Headline
back to top

WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR CONSUMERS?
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Anton Troianovski]
For AT&T customers, nothing will change immediately. But in the coming years, AT&T--like just about every other carrier--will need to find a way to get access to more airwave frequencies to make sure it can support the surge of data traffic on its network. That was a problem the T-Mobile deal was supposed to solve. If AT&T isn't able to find another solution, higher prices and worse service quality could result. For now, AT&T is likely to continue to manage customers' data use by charging heavy users more. AT&T will also look to improve network performance in heavy-usage markets like New York and Chicago by installing more antennas and building better connections between the antennas and the network's core. And while AT&T will need to pay T-Mobile's parent $3 billion in cash and $1 billion in spectrum assets to make up for the deal falling through, that won't be much of a hit to the company's books. AT&T reported $94 billion in revenue for the first nine months of 2011.
For T-Mobile customers, there’s a lot of uncertainty swirling around T-Mobile--most of all because its owner, Deutsche Telekom AG of Germany, has said it wants to exit the U.S. market. For now, expect T-Mobile to continue to compete strongly for value-conscious customers. The company is able to offer relatively cheap smartphone rate plans, and it's also been making a push to gain more customers who don't want to sign up for a two-year contract. But in the longer term, T-Mobile faces serious challenges. The uncertainty of the AT&T deal left the company in limbo for nearly a year--a very long time in the fast-changing telecom industry. T-Mobile is now the only national carrier without the iPhone. And it doesn't have a plan in place to upgrade its network to the fourth-generation standard already being adopted at Verizon Wireless, AT&T, and Sprint Nextel Corp. To do that, T-Mobile will need an investment that Deutsche Telekom so far hasn't been willing to make.
For customers of other carriers, expect the wireless industry to remain in flux.
benton.org/node/107497 | Wall Street Journal
Recommend this Headline
back to top

REGULATORS REACT
[SOURCE: Benton Foundation, AUTHOR: Kevin Taglang]
AT&T’s proposed acquisition of T-Mobile was being reviewed by both the Department of Justice and the Federal Communications Commission. Here’s how the regulators reacted to the Dec 19 announcement that AT&T would no longer pursue the deal.
Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole said, “This result is a victory for the millions of Americans who use mobile wireless telecommunications services. A significant competitor remains in the marketplace and consumers will benefit from a quick resolution of this matter without the unnecessary expense of taxpayer money and government resources.” Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division Sharis A. Pozen said, “Consumers won today. Had AT&T acquired T-Mobile, consumers in the wireless marketplace would have faced higher prices and reduced innovation. We sued to protect consumers who rely on competition in this important industry. With the parties’ abandonment, we achieved that result.”
“The FCC is committed to ensuring a competitive mobile marketplace that drives innovation and investment, creates jobs and benefits consumers. This deal would have done the opposite. The U.S. mobile industry leads the world in mobile innovation, and we agree with AT&T that Congress should pass incentive auction legislation that will unleash new spectrum for mobile broadband,” said FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski.
benton.org/node/107496 | Dept of Justice | FCC
Recommend this Headline
back to top

VICTORY FOR CONSUMERS AND REGULATORS
[SOURCE: Los Angeles Times, AUTHOR: David Lazarus]
[Commentary] Even a behemoth like AT&T knows when it's licked. Wireless users can notch this as an important win not just for a competitive marketplace but also for newly reinvigorated regulatory agencies that, for the first time in a long time, have ruled that bigger isn't always better when it comes to telecom services. Customers will be just fine as long as AT&T keeps competing and innovating to retain their business. And investment will continue flowing into wireless technology because everyone knows that smartphones, iPads and their ilk aren't going away. A company like AT&T stifles investment in its wireless network at its own peril. When a company with the size and breadth of AT&T seeks to erase one of only a handful of viable competitors, that's a play for market domination, pure and simple. AT&T wanted T-Mobile's wireless resources. But more important, it wanted T-Mobile's market share. The Justice Department saw the deal for what it was, as did the Federal Communications Commission. And now that AT&T has decided to move on, perhaps it too will acknowledge that this was a merger too far. Until the next merger, that is.
benton.org/node/107495 | Los Angeles Times
Recommend this Headline
back to top

SPRINT’S WIN
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Arik Hesseldahl]
Sprint no longer has to deal with the threat of a merged AT&T-T-Mobile. But it still has to cope with the fact that it is a distant No. 3 to AT&T and Verizon Wireless. And, after betting on a different 4G technology, the company also has to bring up an entirely new network, all while trying to turn off its older Nextel network. Sprint is still losing money. In its most recent quarter, it booked a $301 million loss on revenue of $8.3 billion, which was an improvement over the prior year’s period. On the bright side, it added 1.3 million customers — and that was before it had Apple’s iPhone in its stores to help entice new customers. But while having the iPhone is nice, it’s not helping the bottom line. As The Wall Street Journal reported in October, Sprint has committed to buy more than 30 million iPhones, which will cost it as much as $20 billion over time, and on which it expects to lose money through at least 2014. And that’s not even the half of it. Sprint also plans to spend big to build a new LTE network in 2012, and currently relies on WiMax as its 4G technology. With $5 billion in cash and short-term investments on its balance sheet as of the end of December, Hesse said, the company will have to go to the credit markets and borrow to get the build-out done. Meanwhile, its relationship with the wireless broadband concern Clearwire isn’t exactly helping.
So for Sprint, while one important battle is won, the war to turn the company around — and it will be a tough one — is far from over, and far from victory.
benton.org/node/107494 | Wall Street Journal
Recommend this Headline
back to top

NO JUSTICE FOR USERS
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Editorial staff]
[Commentary] America's second- and fourth-largest cellphone companies called off their $39 billion merger, in a decision that Justice Department trustbusters will surely cheer as a victory for "competition." Consumers, shareholders and American workers might have a different reaction. The real problem isn't AT&T's acquisition plans, but the growing demand for wireless services and the restricted supply of spectrum, which is controlled by—you guessed it—the regulators. Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski has acknowledged the "crunch," as he calls it, and called for new auctions, a process that could take years. Meantime, he might consider allowing current owners of unused spectrum, such as broadcasters, more leeway to use their asset as they see fit. Alas, such a move runs against the top-down economic tinkering that the Obama Administration is so fond of. The next time your cellphone is slow or your call is dropped, don't blame AT&T. Point the phone at Washington.
benton.org/node/107493 | Wall Street Journal
Recommend this Headline
back to top

DT SLAMS REGULATORS
[SOURCE: Financial Times, AUTHOR: Gerrit Wiesmann]
Deutsche Telekom criticized the US authorities alleging they had not given its plans to sell T-Mobile USA to US rival AT&T a proper hearing, a posture that forced the companies to abandon the $39 billion deal. “We never really got to a thorough inspection [of the merger],” René Obermann, Deutsche Telekom chief executive, said, adding that authorities never appeared interested in details of the initial deal and later concessions. Obermann said the merger followed the logic of other tie-ups in the US market and would have created a company “not a whole lot bigger” than the US market leader, Verizon Wireless. “Given that, I don’t really understand the position of US authorities,” he said. He declined to speculate about the motivation of the US Department of Justice and the Federal Communications Commission. The demise of the deal leaves Deutsche Telekom, which had made no secret of its desire to quit the US market, looking for alternatives. Among its options could be an outright sale, merger or joint venture with a competitor. Obermann said the break-up provisions would give T-Mobile US vital extra spectrum, and roaming capabilities, which would help it along for a while. “But this isn’t the whole solution for the long term,” he conceded. AT&T will pay Deutsche Telekom $3 billion in cash as part of the break up, money Deutsche Telekom would use to pay down group net debt – currently slightly above €40bn.
benton.org/node/107492 | Financial Times
Recommend this Headline
back to top

$3 BILLION BREAK UP FEE
[SOURCE: Bloomberg, AUTHOR: Cornelius Rahn]
Deutsche Telekom AG, whose proposed $39 billion sale of T-Mobile USA to AT&T collapsed, has about a year before it needs to start the search for another partner amid rising costs for improving its network. A breakup package that includes the payment of $3 billion in cash to Deutsche Telekom will only cover T-Mobile’s expenses for 12 to 24 months, said Wolfgang Specht, an analyst at WestLB AG in Dusseldorf. If T-Mobile doesn’t find a new partner after that time, it risks failing to generate enough operating cash flow to cover capital spending, he said. “Stabilization is the first step and then it’s about finding a new partner in the medium term,” said Specht, who has an “add” recommendation on Deutsche Telekom shares. “In the long run a standalone strategy seems impossible. Everything from here on is only a second-best solution.” T-Mobile is valued at about $19 billion, Berenberg Bank analyst Paul Marsch wrote in a Dec. 12 note, citing a survey the bank held with about 40 investors “a few weeks back.” To generate cash, Deutsche Telekom may reconsider plans to sell its tower network in the U.S., Chief Financial Officer Timotheus Hoettges said on a conference call today. A sale of those assets, which was considered until the AT&T agreement, may bring as much as $3 billion, said Jonathan Atkin, an analyst at RBC Capital Markets. In addition to the $3 billion in cash, T-Mobile will receive a package of wireless frequencies from AT&T in 128 market areas, including Los Angeles, Dallas, Houston, Washington and San Francisco. The separation agreement also includes a roaming deal lasting at least seven years, which Deutsche Telekom said will improve T-Mobile’s coverage to 280 million potential customers from 230 million. T-Mobile USA spent about $3 billion annually on capital expenditures in recent years, including network upgrades, the CEO said. Upgrading to the faster long-term evolution technology being rolled out by its competitors, including new spectrum, may cost $8 billion to $9 billion and such a process may take three years, RBC’s Atkin said.
benton.org/node/107491 | Bloomberg
Recommend this Headline
back to top

AT&T HAS FEW OPTIONS
[SOURCE: Bloomberg, AUTHOR: Scott Moritz]
The collapse of AT&T’s $39 billion bid for T-Mobile USA leaves the second-largest U.S. mobile carrier with few attractive strategic options as it seeks to challenge market leader Verizon Wireless. To accommodate data-usage growth, AT&T argued it needed the airwaves the T-Mobile USA purchase would have brought. With that option now unavailable, AT&T can either seek to buy spectrum from another company, wait for the government to auction more frequencies or try to squeeze more capacity out of its current airwaves. Each option is time-consuming, expensive and risky, said Colby Synesael, a Cowen & Co. analyst in New York. Already criticized for dropped calls and network coverage, AT&T will face more constrained capacity than Verizon Wireless, Synesael said. That may hurt customer growth at a time when carriers are seeking to sign up lucrative smartphone and tablet subscribers who will generate revenue for years to come. Earlier this year, AT&T lost U.S. exclusivity to the Apple Inc. iPhone. While AT&T focused on winning regulatory approval for the takeover, rivals negotiated their own airwave deals. That means several spectrum assets that would have still been available for AT&T to purchase earlier this year are now off the market.
benton.org/node/107490 | Bloomberg
Recommend this Headline
back to top

AT&T LOSES; VERIZON WINS
[SOURCE: GigaOm, AUTHOR: Kevin Fitchard]
Verizon Wireless couldn’t have asked for a better outcome to the AT&T/T-Mobile saga. Not only did its biggest rival fail to leapfrog Verizon in size, but AT&T wasted nearly a year’s worth of lobbying resources in the attempt. Where AT&T failed to pick up more 4G spectrum through a controversial merger, Verizon took the easier route toward building its 4G holdings, buying up licenses from cable companies. Most importantly, from Verizon’s perspective, AT&T/T-Mobile fizzled out with a whimper rather than imploding with a bang, resulting in no new regulations on the wireless industry and no Federal Communications Commission or federal court decisions to impede Verizon’s future consolidation ambitions. Verizon’s official position on AT&T-Mo was that it remained unopposed to the merger as long as it imposed no new regulations or conditions on wireless operators. That was a pipe dream, and Verizon knew it. Any merger the size of the AT&T deal would surely have resulted in divestitures in multiple markets, along with restrictions on how and where AT&T used its new spectrum. And any conditions imposed on AT&T would have applied to Verizon when and if it sought to buy a competitor or more spectrum in the future. Verizon was hoping the minimize the damage, and it got its wish. The deal never got to a vote before Federal Communications Commission and never saw an official court date in the U.S. Department of Justice’s antitrust lawsuit. Of course, the failure of AT&T-Mo likely means any deal of such scale is out of the question for the foreseeable future. If Verizon had any ambition on making a bid on Sprint, those hopes are now dead, though an acquisition of a MetroPCS or Leap Wireless might still be possible. But given Verizon’s actions in the last few weeks it’s unlikely it was ever entertaining the possibility of buying Sprint or any other operator.
benton.org/node/107489 | GigaOm
Recommend this Headline
back to top

WIRELESS DEALS WILL CONTINUE
[SOURCE: GigaOm, AUTHOR: Stacey Higginbotham]
AT&T has thrown in the towel on its acquisition of T-Mobile and in doing so basically kept the mobile industry stalled through much of 2011 as experts, executives and consumer organizations tried to figure out what such a large deal would mean. Now that the deal is off the table, the industry can return to solving the big question that plagues wireless in the U.S., and that question is how the heck will operators get the spectrum and build the networks they need to support robust demand for 4G wireless services and still make money. Now that the deal is officially dead, and we know a bit more about the terms of the breakup fee, it looks like T-Mobile might be star of the wireless industry in 2012 as everyone except AT&T and Verizon try to make a deal. This leaves the smaller players such as Leap Wireless and Metro PCS to wrangle some kind of partnership with T-Mobile, now that it may have some of the $4 billion breakup fee and some of AT&T’s airwaves. Dish Networks, the satellite TV player that’s trying to become a mobile operator, has cash and the desire to be a wireless operator with T-Mobile’s help, but the history of satellite guys getting into mobile is pretty iffy. The most interesting mobile operator to watch in the coming year might be Sprint as it faces a decision as to if it wants to pursue T-Mobile, stick with Clearwire or continue stringing along LightSquared, which plans to build a 4G LTE network but is having a hard time moving forward. When it comes to 4G, like Velma Kelly in Chicago, Sprint simply cannot do it alone. No one can, which means AT&T could try again with a more politically acceptable deal.
benton.org/node/107488 | GigaOm
Recommend this Headline
back to top

MORE SPECTRUM/WIRELESS

VERIZON-SPECTRUMCO APPLICATION
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
Verizon Wireless and SpectrumCo, the consortium of cable operators, officially asked the Federal Communications Commission to transfer the cable operators 122 wireless spectrum licenses to the wireless phone provider. In the public interest statement from the two explaining why the FCC should allow the transfer of the licenses, Verizon and SpectrumCo argue that the deal "will enable Verizon Wireless to add network capacity to meet growing demand, so that customers will continue to enjoy the high-quality, high-speed services that state-of-the-art wireless broadband technology can provide." The cable companies – Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Bright House Networks -- have concluded that "constructing and operating a standalone facilities-based wireless network with that spectrum would not provide a return that would warrant incurring the substantial costs and risks involved." The spectrum represents 20 MHZ in 120 markets, except Houston, which has 30 MHZ. The parties point out that it is simply a license transfer of spectrum not currently being used, so there are no nonspectrum assets like facilities or customers and no reduction in choices for wireless service in the affected areas. As a result, they argue, the FCC's review should be expedient and limited since there are no anticompetitive effects, they say, adding: "The spectrum transfers comply with all Commission rules, require no waivers, and will not result in any violation of the Communications Act or any other applicable statutory provision." While the companies say the sale would help relieve some of the spectrum capacity crunch, they say Verizon will still need more and still supports the FCC plan on reclaiming 500 MHZ from broadcasters and others.
Benton Foundation Chairman and CEO Charles Benton said: "The Benton Foundation urges the Department of Justice and the Federal Communications Commission to closely review the Verizon- SpectrumCo transaction and marketing agreements with a keen eye on the implications for competition, consumer choice, wireless and pay TV prices, and innovation in both wireless and wireline services. We are concerned that Verizon Wireless’s spectrum holdings may grow so concentrated as to prevent new competitors from entering the wireless marketplace."
"It is critical that the FCC be prepared to act if the application and the agreements raise the possibility of anti-competitive coordination, said Harold Feld, legal director of Public Knowledge. “While it is important to get spectrum into productive use, the possibility that this may create 'backdoor' channels by which competitors may divide the market and keep out potential new entrants is very real. The FCC has authority to insist on reviewing the associated agreements, whatever the parties may say."
“No matter how forcefully Verizon claims that this is ‘a spectrum only transaction,’ it is much more than that. The FCC’s mandate is to look at the totality of the circumstances to decide if a proposed transfer is in the public interest. This one raises serious questions about the state of competition in both the wireless and video markets,” said Media Access Project Senior Vice President and Policy Director Andrew Schwartzman.
Free Press Policy Director Matt Wood said, “The cable cartel’s partnership with Verizon Wireless might be convenient for business, but it will most certainly come with a high cost to consumers. Without real competition for cable or mobile phone service, there's no pressure to lower prices or innovate. For consumers that means no choice but skyrocketing prices and onerous contract agreements while the cartel rakes in exorbitant profits.”
benton.org/node/107448 | Broadcasting&Cable | Benton Foundation | Public Knowledge | Media Access Project | Free Press | Washington Post
Recommend this Headline
back to top

VERIZON SPECTRUM DEALS
[SOURCE: ars technica, AUTHOR: Matthew Lasar]
[Commentary] Ding dong, sing the naysayers, AT&T's bid to buy T-Mobile is almost dead. Meanwhile, Verizon is stealthily hunting down spectrum via a lower profile strategy that could generate far less public grief. Consider its recent moves.
On Dec 16, Verizon announced that it has cut a deal with Cox Communications to buy 20 MHz of the cable company's spectrum for $315 million. The purchased licenses are located in the Advanced Wireless Services (AWS) zone, and cover about 28 million "points of presence," aka "POPs"—access links to the Internet or local exchange carriers. In November, Cox disclosed that it was phasing out its wireless service, although it would continue to serve its subscribers through the end of March. On top of the sale, Cox and Verizon will function as "agents," authorized to market each other's products and services—no small detail given that Cox is the third largest cable operator in the United States. But this acquisition pales in scope to another brokered earlier this month. On December 2, Verizon announced that it would acquire 122 AWS licenses covering 259 million POPs for the price of $3.6 billion. The seller is SpectrumCo, LLC, jointly owned by Time Warner Cable, Bright House Networks, and Comcast. Although the Verizon/SpectrumCo transaction is only about a tenth of the monetary size of the AT&T/T-Mobile merger, the participants will still have to seek a green light from FCC and submit to a Hart-Rodino Act review of the sale. This means that the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission will look at the deal. The Cox transaction already has at least one prominent critic: Andrew J. Schwartzman of the Media Access Project. Cox Communications has joined its cable brethren in an arrangement "that insures that Verizon and the cable industry will stop competing with each other," Schwartzman declared in a press release:
“It is clear Verizon will stop building out its FiOS video service. From here on out, cable won't do wireless, and Verizon won't do video. This new cartel means higher prices and less competition. The cease-fire is more important to consumers than the proposed AT&T/T-Mobile transaction because it is much more likely to happen.”
Indeed, the Cox/Verizon deal gives credence to ancient telecom wisdom—the lower the scale and visibility of your proposed merger or buyout, the more easily it will get past regulators.
benton.org/node/107441 | Ars Technica
Recommend this Headline
back to top

2011 REVIEW OF WIRELESS
[SOURCE: The Huffington Post, AUTHOR: Josh Levy]
[Commentary] Another year, another 12 months in which the mobile carriers did their best to screw us. AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon do so many bad, annoying and anti-consumer things that it's almost impossible to document it all. So below is a catalog of simply the most egregious acts the carriers perpetrated this year. Each company has its own special way of screwing its customers. But some trends emerged. All of the carriers tried to charge us more for text messaging and data. They were all keen to grab our sensitive data to sell to marketers or -- in some cases -- give to the government. And Verizon twice showed that it's willing to block apps from reaching our phones -- even when those apps come straight from the Googleplex. Above all, AT&T showed that squeezing every last penny out of us isn't enough to satisfy its bottomless need for profits, so it decided it needed to buy T-Mobile to kill wireless competition for good. Thankfully, the FCC and the Justice Department -- along with millions of Americans -- saw the light and the deal is as good as dead.
The Carriers Hold Customer Data for Years
Apple Files Patent to Block iPhone Cameras
AT&T Raises Texting Rates
Unlimited Data Plans Are Dead. Long Live Unlimited Data!
MetroPCS Fires Shot at Network Neutrality
Verizon Sues to Kill Network Neutrality
Carrier IQ and Cellphone Spying
Verizon Blocks Tethering App, Breaks Law
Verizon Blocks Google Wallet
AT&T's Failed Merger with T-Mobile
benton.org/node/107433 | Huffington Post, The
Recommend this Headline
back to top

SURFING ON KINDLE FIRE
[SOURCE: GigaOm, AUTHOR: Kevin Tofel]
[Commentary] Amazon’s Kindle Fire, arguably a successful 7-inch tablet, is locked down more than people might think. When trying to browse the Google Android Market website in the Fire’s web browser, the device instead opens up Amazon’s Kindle Fire application store. Since the Fire doesn’t officially have access to the Android Market, I can understand the device highlighting its own app store. But to specifically hijack a browser URL and redirect it is disturbing and sets an ugly precedent. I have several concerns here. First is the idea of limiting what a consumer can or can’t do on a device that they’ve purchased.
benton.org/node/107471 | GigaOm
Recommend this Headline
back to top

SIRI AND LOCATION-BASED SERVICES
[SOURCE: GigaOm, AUTHOR: Ryan Kim]
[Commentary] Location-based apps have gotten a lot of attention but they still seem to have a tougher time cracking the mainstream. I’ve been thinking about how these services can accelerate their growth. One of the most intriguing possibilities is the emergence of more voice-enabled artificial intelligence assistants like Apple’s Siri. A lot of apps could make use of Siri or similar technology as a shortcut for all kinds of actions, letting people speak naturally to accomplish tasks that might be harder to access using touch input. But I think location-based services specifically could benefit most from Siri and whatever equivalents Google or Microsoft put together on their mobile platforms. We’re already seeing some of that promise in action with voice-activated navigation services, and Siri can already pull up nearby restaurants using Yelp. But there’s a lot more that can be done.
benton.org/node/107470 | GigaOm
Recommend this Headline
back to top

VERIZON AND GOOGLE WALLET
[SOURCE: Internet Architecture and Innovation, AUTHOR: Barbara van Schewick]
Two weeks ago, various news outlets reported that Verizon Wireless’s new Galaxy Nexus phone will not support Google Wallet, Google’s mobile payment application. Based on what we know from press reports, it seems that Verizon Wireless is violating the open-devices and open-applications conditions in its legal licenses for part of the 700 MHz spectrum (the so-called “C-Block”) over which the company’s LTE network operates. There is, however, great uncertainty about what exactly is going on.
I wrote a letter to the Federal Communications Commission asking the Commission to investigate the situation as quickly as possible and send a signal to the market – innovators, consumers, and licensees – that the openness conditions will be enforced. The letter explains what we know about the facts, why Verizon’s behavior violates the openness conditions, why this violation matters, and what the FCC should do. This is an important case that will have implications not only for the mobile payments market, but also for any application or service potentially available on a mobile network:
First, Verizon’s behavior hurts Verizon customers
Second, Verizon’s behavior hurts competition in the emerging, potentially huge market for mobile payments technologies and associated services.
Third, Verizon’s actions hurt innovation, in mobile payments or even in any other mobile technology.
Finally, Verizon’s conduct undermines the FCC’s general approach towards mobile Internet openness
benton.org/node/107429 | Internet Architecture and Innovation | B&C
Recommend this Headline
back to top

OWNERSHIP

APPLE VICTORY
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Hayley Tsukayama]
The U.S. International Trade Commission ruled on the first definitive case of the smartphone patent wars, handing a narrow victory to Apple. The commission ruled that HTC devices that use “data tapping” technology in a specific way will be hit with an import ban starting April 19, 2012. The technology, as outlined by patent expert Florian Mueller in his blog, allows devices to look at phone numbers in unstructured data formats such as e-mail and allows other applications — such as a dialer app — to process that kind of data. The ban applies only to devices that use the technology and, Mueller said, if Google and HTC can create a workaround in the Android system, the ban won’t apply to any HTC devices. “If Google can implement this popular feature, which users of modern-day smartphones really expect, without infringing on the two patent claims found infringed, this import ban won’t have any effect whatsoever,” Mueller said. If Apple can claim more small wins like the “data tapping” patent, Mueller said in his post, it could advance its case against Android feature by feature.
benton.org/node/107479 | Washington Post | ars technica | GigaOm
Recommend this Headline
back to top

CALL FOR GOOGLE PROBE
[SOURCE: Los Angeles Times, AUTHOR: Jim Puzzanghera]
The chairman and top Republican on the Senate antitrust subcommittee have asked regulators to investigate Google's search practices, saying they were concerned the company was biasing results to favor its own products. Sens Herb Kohl (D-WI) and Mike Lee (R-Utah) -- sent a letter to the Federal Trade Commission, which already is conducting a broad antitrust investigation into Google's business practices, including search and advertising. Sens Kohl and Lee questioned Google Chairman Eric Schmidt at a contentious hearing in September. Schmidt's answers, along with testimony from two Google competitors, raised questions that should be explored by regulators, the senators said in their letter to FTC Chairman Jonathan Leibowitz. "We believe these allegations regarding Google's search engine practices raise important competition issues," they wrote, whose committee has been conducting its own review of Google. "We are committed to ensuring that consumers benefit from robust competition in online search and that the Internet remains the source of much free-market innovation."
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2011/12/sens-herb-kohl-and-mike-lee-call-for-google-antitrust-probe.html
Senators urge regulator to take a hard look at Google's search tactics (The Hill)
benton.org/node/107478 | Los Angeles Times | The Hill
Recommend this Headline
back to top

BT SUES GOOGLE
[SOURCE: The Guardian, AUTHOR: Charles Arthur]
British Telecom is claiming billions of dollars of damages from Google in a lawsuit filed in the US which says that the Android mobile operating system infringes a number of the telecoms company's key patents. The lawsuit, filed in the state of Delaware in the US, relates to six patents which BT says are infringed by the Google Maps, Google Music, location-based advertising and Android Market products on Android. If successful, the suit could mean that Google or mobile handset makers will have to pay BT royalties on each Android handset in use and which they produce. That could be expensive: Android is presently the most successful smartphone platform in the world, with its handsets making more than 40% of sales, equating to more than 40m produced every quarter. Google recently said that more than 500,000 Android devices are activated every day. BT's move – which could also be repeated in Europe – means that Google is now fending off lawsuits against Android from six large publicly-traded companies, according to Florian Müller, an independent expert who follows the twists and turns of international patent litigation. BT joins Apple. Oracle, Microsoft, eBay and Gemalto, a digital security company.
benton.org/node/107420 | Guardian, The
Recommend this Headline
back to top

SPRINT SUES
[SOURCE: Multichannel News, AUTHOR: Todd Spangler]
Sprint Nextel sued Comcast, Time Warner Cable, Cox Communications and Cable One, alleging that the cable companies infringe 12 patents related to transmitting voice calls over Internet Protocol networks. Sprint filed four separate lawsuits against the cable companies in the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas in Kansas City. "The cable companies sued by Sprint are continuing to offer phone services that use this technology without obtaining a license or permission from Sprint," the wireless company said. "Sprint alleges that each of these companies has infringed at least 12 [voice-over-IP] patents by selling cable voice systems and services that use the technology protected by the Sprint patents." The dozen patents at issue include some that Sprint had successfully sued voice-over-Internet provider Vonage over. A federal jury in September 2007 found Vonage infringed six Sprint patents, after which Vonage agreed to pay $80 million to Sprint to settle the lawsuit and to license Sprint's VoIP patent portfolio.
benton.org/node/107487 | Multichannel News
Recommend this Headline
back to top

VALUE OF TWITTER
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Rolfe Winkler]
That a member of an autocratic Arab regime would invest in Twitter, a key enabler of the Arab Spring, is great fodder for tweets. But for all the excitement online, it doesn't herald a revolution in the website's ownership. That is because the $300 million investment by Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal actually came months ago as part of Twitter's last round of financing. More important, it wasn't the company that received the prince's money. Rather, it went to existing investors and employees looking to cash in part of their stake, according to a person familiar with the matter. It is a good indication that Twitter's road to an initial public offering will be much longer than that of several of its peers. Twitter isn't ready to market its shares to the broader public because its efforts to generate revenue have been slow to develop. Advertising is the primary way the company makes money, but Twitter's ad inventory is a tougher sell than, say, Google's. Placing ads next to search results makes sense because searchers have indicated precisely what they are looking for. On the other hand, promoted tweets in Twitter users' timelines can read like spam. Another issue for the company is that key executive Jack Dorsey pulls double duty as Twitter's product chief and as CEO of Square, his mobile-payments start-up company. Given all this, it makes sense for existing investors to take some money off the table when the opportunity presents itself. That is especially so in light of the implied princely valuation of some $8.4 billion: more than 30 times Twitter's 2012 ad revenue, as estimated by eMarketer.
benton.org/node/107484 | Wall Street Journal | WSJ
Recommend this Headline
back to top

CONTENT

DON’T BREAK THE INTERNET
[SOURCE: Stanford Law Review, AUTHOR: Mark Lemley, David Levine, David Post]
Two bills now pending in Congress -- the PROTECT IP Act of 2011 (Protect IP) in the Senate and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the House -- represent the latest legislative attempts to address a serious global problem: large-scale online copyright and trademark infringement. Although the bills differ in certain respects, they share an underlying approach and an enforcement philosophy that pose grave constitutional problems and that could have potentially disastrous consequences for the stability and security of the Internet’s addressing system, for the principle of interconnectivity that has helped drive the Internet’s extraordinary growth, and for free expression. To begin with, the bills represent an unprecedented, legally sanctioned assault on the Internet’s critical technical infrastructure. Based upon nothing more than an application by a federal prosecutor alleging that a foreign website is “dedicated to infringing activities,” Protect IP authorizes courts to order all U.S. Internet service providers, domain name registries, domain name registrars, and operators of domain name servers -- a category that includes hundreds of thousands of small and medium-sized businesses, colleges, universities, nonprofit organizations, and the like -- to take steps to prevent the offending site’s domain name from translating to the correct Internet protocol address. These orders can be issued even when the domains in question are located outside of the United States and registered in top-level domains (e.g., .fr, .de, or .jp) whose operators are themselves located outside the United States; indeed, some of the bills’ remedial provisions are directed solely at such domains. Directing the remedial power of the courts towards the Internet’s core technical infrastructure in this sledgehammer fashion has impact far beyond intellectual property rights enforcement -- it threatens the fundamental principle of interconnectivity that is at the very heart of the Internet.
benton.org/node/107464 | Stanford Law Review
Recommend this Headline
back to top

LAW OF ONLINE SHARING
[SOURCE: Technology Review, AUTHOR: Paul Boutin]
The idea of limitless growth gives sleepless nights to environmentalists, but not to Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg. He espouses a law of social sharing, which predicts that every year, for the foreseeable future, the amount of information you share on the Web will double. That rule of thumb can be visualized mathematically as a rapidly growing exponential curve. More simply, our online social lives are set to get significantly busier. As for Facebook, more personal data means better ad targeting. If things work out, Zuckerberg's net worth will follow a similar trajectory to that described in his law of social sharing. That law is said to be mathematically derived from data inside Facebook. In ambition, it is closely modeled on Moore's Law, which was conceived by the computer-processor pioneer Gordon Moore in 1965 and has been at work in every advance in computing since. Also an exponential curve, it states that every two years twice as many transistors can be fitted onto a chip of any given area for the same price, allowing processing power to get cheaper and more capable.
benton.org/node/107485 | Technology Review
Recommend this Headline
back to top

TELEVISION

POLITICAL ADS AND CAMPAIGN COVERAGE
[SOURCE: Nieman Watchdog, AUTHOR: Bill Wheatley]
[Commentary] 2012 will be a boon for TV stations. Bill Wheatley suggests they set up ‘Windfall tithing’ operations, pumping 10 percent of their bounty into solid election-year reporting to counter some of the misleading and even false commercials they will be running. It’s no secret that, while some stations do a good job covering elections (the six Post-Newsweek stations, for example, recently announced a vigorous 2012 political-coverage plan), many stations do not. Part of this stems from a belief by numerous news directors that politics and government are boring, that viewers are just not interested. This notion has consequences: A study by USC’s Annenberg School revealed that, over 14 randomly selected days in 2009, Los Angeles television stations devoted an average of only 22 seconds to coverage of local government news in each half-hour newscast; crime received an average of seven times more play. Despite such embarrassments, getting stations to underwrite more and better election coverage will be a big challenge. Some general managers will assert that their stations are entitled to have a really good year financially to help make up for the relatively weak years they experienced during the Great Recession; others can be expected to echo the claim that the public lacks a passion for politics. They – and we – shouldn’t forget that in 2008 a record 132 million of our fellow citizens cared enough about the future of the country and their local communities to go to the polls and cast their ballots. This year, as then, persuading the electorate to vote in a particular way will be the mission of political ads. TV stations should have a mission, too: to make sure that viewers have the information they need to make smart choices on Election Day. Windfall tithing can help accomplish that. By embracing it, stations have a chance to do good in 2012, while still doing very well. [Bill Wheatley is a former executive vice-president of NBC News and a onetime news director at WBZ-TV, Boston]
benton.org/node/107466 | Nieman Watchdog
Recommend this Headline
back to top

INTERNET

MISUNDERSTANDING RACE AND THE DIGITAL DIVIDE
[SOURCE: Minority Media and Telecommunications Council, AUTHOR: Joseph Miller]
[Commentary] What is to blame for digital age inequality? The digital divide behind door number one? Or the digital divide behind door number two? These seem like silly questions. That’s because they are. But no matter what the reason is, some advocates always manage to find a way to misunderstand the lifestyle choices of people of color. On December 3rd, The New York Times published an op-Ed by Susan Crawford, a long time net neutrality advocate, professor of law at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of law, and former special assistant to President Obama on science, technology, and innovation policy. Crawford wrote that smartphones—the devices that African-Americans and Latinos overwhelmingly prefer for accessing the internet—provide a “second class” tier of Internet service, as compared to the high-speed wired internet access that middle-class urbanites and suburbanites are able to enjoy via computers connected directly to the Internet. In a blog post in Colorlines—a blog focusing on issues affecting minorities—Colorlines News Editor Jamilah King reiterated Crawford’s thesis, then went the extra mile of calling out the NAACP and National Urban League for taking funding from telecommunications companies like AT&T and Sprint. The problem with Crawford and King’s approach is that they cast wireless broadband and smartphones in their worst possible light. High-speed broadband and wireless broadband each have a distinct set of unique advantages over the other, making neither of them superior to the other in all respects. If wireless were a substitute for high speed internet access, there would be no competition.
High-speed internet access and bandwidth are absolutely essential for supporting American innovation in Silicon Valley. But commoditizing minorities to bolster that underlying argument is patently irresponsible. There is no “new” digital divide—we are faced with the same digital divide that we have been faced with since at least 1940. Wireless broadband has helped to close part of that gap, but we still have a long way to go.
benton.org/node/107421 | Minority Media and Telecommunications Council
Recommend this Headline
back to top

LABOR

OUTSOURCED CALL CENTERS
[SOURCE: Connected Planet, AUTHOR: Joan Engebretson]
Outsourced call centers pose a serious security threat, according to a new report issued late last week from the Communications Workers of America. The report, titled “Why Shipping Call Center Jobs Overseas Hurts Us Back Home,” cites several examples of security breaches involving outsourced call centers, which were reported by various U.S. and international media. Here are a few examples cited in the report:
Call center employees in India were caught after stealing $426,000 from American Citibank customers by coaxing them into revealing their passwords
A Bangalore, India-based call center employee was arrested after stealing $420,000 from customer accounts at HSBC
An undercover journalist reported that he bought personal details, including passwords, of 1,000 British Bank customers from a Delhi IT worker
A Pakistani woman threatened to post patient records on the Internet unless she got a raise
benton.org/node/107431 | Connected Planet
Recommend this Headline
back to top

ADVERTISING

VERIZON-CABLEVISION SETTLEMENT
[SOURCE: Bloomberg, AUTHOR: Thom Weidlich, Janon Fisher]
Verizon Communications, the second-biggest U.S. phone company, and Cablevision Systems settled a lawsuit over ads that Cablevision claimed misrepresented its Internet speeds. Cablevision, the fifth-largest U.S. cable-television provider by subscribers, sued Dec. 6 claiming Verizon was using outdated information. The ads ran their course Dec. 17 and Verizon will have new ads sometime in the future, company spokesman William Kula said. “Cablevision and Verizon have reached an agreement to resolve the dispute without further need for litigation,” Kula and James Maiella, a Cablevision spokesman, said. They declined to disclose terms of the settlement. A hearing had been scheduled for Dec 19 before U.S. District Judge Joanna Seybert in Central Islip, New York, on Cablevision’s request to force New York-based Verizon to pull the ads. The TV, radio, direct-mail and Internet spots running in the New York area claimed that a “just released” Federal Communications Commission study shows Bethpage, New York-based Cablevision delivers at most 59 percent of its advertised speeds during peak hours, according to the complaint. The FCC report from August referred to tests performed in March, and Cablevision said it has upgraded its system since then. On Dec. 5, the FCC said in a blog post that Cablevision’s results in the report were outdated and its performance had improved.
benton.org/node/107473 | Bloomberg
Recommend this Headline
back to top

FCC REFORM

FCC REFORM BILL
[SOURCE: Politico, AUTHOR: Eliza Krigman]
The campaign by congressional Republicans for “process reform” at the Federal Communications Commission is as much about lawmakers wanting to handcuff the commission as it is about how the agency operates.
A half-dozen Republicans who sit on the telecommunications subcommittees were quick to point out in recent interviews about the FCC the issues on which they think the commission has abused its mandate — network neutrality, the AT&T/T-Mobile deal, and Universal Service Fund reform, to name just a few. But rarely did the FCC’s processes come up. Only two lawmakers mentioned them, and one, House Communications and Technology Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden (R-Ore.), is the author of legislation to overhaul how the commission operates. While it’s true that Walden’s proposal would make the FCC more transparent — preventing last-minute “data dumps” before controversial votes, for instance — the proposal also would undeniably make it a lot harder for the FCC to regulate the telecom industry. The GOP reforms would have reduced the odds of getting net neutrality rules passed. And the agency would have far less leeway to restrict — or in the case of AT&T/T-Mobile, reject — big telecom mergers. Though process is part of the equation, the debate centers on whether reining in the FCC would be a good thing.
benton.org/node/107486 | Politico
Recommend this Headline
back to top

POLICYMAKERS

SOPA SPONSORS’ CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS
[SOURCE: MapLight, AUTHOR: Jeffrey ErnstFriedman]
The House Judiciary Committee on December 15 held a markup of the so-called SOPA Act (HR 3261), a bill that has produced surprising allegiances and adversaries and has pit some of California's most powerful business interests against each other. The measure, which would crack down on Web sites that offer or sell pirated and counterfeit products, is opposed by a collection of the largest tech companies because they believe it would come at the cost of innovation and future jobs. The bill's supporters, spearheaded by entertainment producers, believe that the measure is necessary to protect consumers from potentially dangerous products and to protect US companies and workers from losing profits and jobs, respectively. The Stop Online Piracy Act would allow the Department of Justice to shut down any website determined to be facilitating online piracy as well as order any Internet search provider to block links to the offending site. The debate over the bill's language has pitted the entertainment capital, Los Angeles, against the tech incubator, Silicon Valley. The measure is supported by entertainment producers such as Comcast, Disney, Sony, and the RIAA. It is opposed by tech companies such as Facebook, Google, Mozilla, and Yahoo!
Since the beginning of the 2010 election cycle, the 32 sponsors of the bill have received almost 4 times as much in campaign contributions from the movie, music, and TV entertainment industries ($1,983,596), which support the bill, as they have received from the software and Internet industries ($524,977), which believe the language goes too far.
benton.org/node/107418 | MapLight
Recommend this Headline
back to top

FCC NAMES HENNING SCHULZRINNE CHIEF TECHNOLOGY OFFICER
[SOURCE: Federal Communications Commission, AUTHOR: Press release]
Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski announced the appointment of Henning Schulzrinne as Chief Technology Officer. As Chief Technology Officer, Schulzrinne will guide the FCC’s work on technology and engineering issues, together with the FCC’s Office of Engineering and Technology. He will advise on matters across the agency to ensure that FCC policies are driving technological innovation, including serving as a resource to FCC Commissioners. He will also help the FCC engage with technology experts outside the agency and promote technical excellence among agency staff. He will be based in the FCC’s Office of Strategic Planning and Policy Analysis.
Schulzrinne is Julian Clarence Levi Professor of Mathematical Methods and Computer Science and Professor of Engineering at The Fu Foundation School of Engineering at Columbia University. He has been an Engineering Fellow at the FCC since 2010. He has published more than 250 journal and conference papers, and more than 70 Internet Requests for Comment (RFCs). He is widely known for the development of key protocols that enable voice-over-IP (VoIP) and other multimedia applications that are now Internet standards, including the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). His research interests include Internet multimedia systems, applied network engineering, wireless networks, security, quality of service, and performance evaluation.
Schulzrinne received his undergraduate degree in economics and electrical engineering from the Darmstadt University of Technology, Germany, his MSEE degree as a Fulbright scholar from the University of Cincinnati, Ohio and his Ph.D. from the University of Massachusetts in Amherst, Massachusetts. He was a member of technical staff at AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill and an associate department head at GMD-Fokus (Berlin), before joining the Computer Science and Electrical Engineering departments at Columbia University, New York. He is an IEEE Fellow and a former member of the Internet Architecture Board (IAB).
benton.org/node/107442 | Federal Communications Commission | B&C
Recommend this Headline
back to top

MMTC LEADERSHIP
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
Former FCC Commissioner, Benton Foundation General Counsel and longtime chair of the Minority Media & Telecommunications Council Henry Rivera has been named chairman emeritus. Rivera will continue as a member of the board and of the executive committee. Julia Johnson, former chair of the Florida Public Service Commission, has been named to succeed Rivera. In addition, former FCC commissioner Deborah Taylor Tate has been named a vice chair as MMTC lines up a new leadership team starting Jan. 1. David Honig remains President of MMTC. Maurita Coley, currently vice chair, will join Honig's staff as VP and COO. Also part of that new team will be treasurer Ronald Johnson, president of Johnson Network Services. Erwin Krasnow, a co-founder, will continue as a vice chair and Ari Fitzgerald continues as secretary.
benton.org/node/107434 | Broadcasting&Cable
Recommend this Headline
back to top

GOVERNMENT & COMMUNICATIONS

CHINA TIGHENS CYBER CONTROLS
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Loretta Chao, Brian Spegele]
China is launching its strongest official measure yet to quell electronic expressions of discontent, clamping down on its versions of Twitter that have increasingly fueled once-rare protests and threaten to undermine its leaders' firm hold on power. In the name of defending Chinese cyberspace against "harmful information," the Beijing city government announced new rules likely to chill a raucous national conversation on services like Sina Weibo, to which Chinese users are flooding to share brief text messages, photos and video. Officials will require users who post so-called microblogs to register their real names with the microblogging services—to be verified by government authorities—sweeping away the anonymity that has helped cloak dissidents online. The new rules also ban the posting of state secrets and material that could hurt national security, as well as posts that spur ethnic resentment, discrimination or rallies "that disrupt social order," the state-run Xinhua news agency said. The rules didn't mention penalties. The move represents a potential turning point as the Internet has become an increasingly disruptive force for China's leaders ahead of once-a-decade transition next year, when China's top two leadership positions will change hands.
benton.org/node/107444 | Wall Street Journal
Recommend this Headline
back to top

INDIA’S CENSORSHIP PLAN
[SOURCE: National Public Radio, AUTHOR: Elliot Hannon]
India has the world's largest democracy, and one of the most rambunctious. Millions of its young people are cutting edge when it comes to high-tech. Yet the country is still very conservative by Western standards, and a government minister recently said that offensive material on the web should be removed. The way it was reported in India, Communications Minister Kapil Sibal started the whole row by assembling the heads of social networking sites at a meeting in his office in New Delhi. At the time, he was reported to have asked companies, like Google and Facebook, to devise a system to filter through and edit out objectionable material before it could make its way online. In an interview with the Indian cable channel CNN-IBN, Sibal pointed to offensive religious content that could cause ethnic or inter-communal conflict.
benton.org/node/107483 | National Public Radio
Recommend this Headline
back to top