May 2006

To view Benton's Headlines feed in your RSS Aggregator, paste
http://www.benton.org/index.php?q=taxonomy/term/6/all/feed into your reader.
For upcoming media policy events, see http://www.benton.org

LEGISLATION UPDATE
Verizon Seeks Change to House Internet Language
Assey: Network Operators Have Incentive to Discriminate
Senate Commerce Sticking With Big Bill
Telecom Bill Foes Step Up Protest
McCain A La Carte Bill Expected Soon

INTERNET/BROADBAND
EarthLink: Bells Must Share Broadband Networks
Proposed rule changes would tangle the Web
What the Misguided Have Missed Regarding Network Neutrality
Keep Internet free, fast
U.S. to Auction Frequencies for In-Flight Internet Use
Plan for Adult Area Sparks a Fight On Control of Web

QUICKLY -- Verizon Fields Offers for Phone Lines; Oklahoma Telcos
Don't Need Video Franchises; Cablevision: Dereg in Massapequa Park;
Think Tank Blog Quotes Internal Verizon Memo Without Attribution

LEGISLATION UPDATE

VERIZON SEEKS CHANGE TO HOUSE INTERNET LANGUAGE
[SOURCE: Reuters]
You know, Verizon said Tuesday, we've been writing these new telecom
laws for you and we just realized, whoops, we have a small revision
or two... The House telecom bill aimed at making it easier for
Verizon and AT&T to get into the subscription television business
isn't as easy as they's like. The House measure codifies "Network
Neutrality" principles that the Federal Communications Commission
adopted last year and encourages high-speed Internet service
providers to ensure that consumers can freely surf the Internet. But
Verizon's Tom Tauke, speaking at Pike & Fischer's 2nd
annual Broadband Policy Summit, said those principles suggest
consumers are entitled to Internet access and competition, which he
said could lead to price controls and other regulations by an
aggressive regulator. "The spirit of the FCC language is fine but
taking that language and putting it in the statute, and the
subsequent litigation that might result from that, I think is
problematic," Tauke said. "So we encourage Congressman Barton and
others to do a little careful drafting of that language so that you
have language that is more appropriate for statute, which doesn't
invite so much litigation down the road," he said. Similar
legislation in the Senate calls for study of the net neutrality
issue, a position that Tauke said his company embraced.
http://asia.reuters.com/business/newsArticle.aspx?type=ousiv&storyID=200...
* Verizon offers rebuttal on net neutrality
http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/05/09/78138_HNnetneutralitylimits_1....
* Verizon Not Looking To Charge Google
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6333013?display=Breaking+News
* Verizon Frets Net-Neutrality Litigation
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6333055.html?display=Breaking+News
* Tauke Says Telecom Bill Needs Stripping-Down
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6332895?display=Breaking+News

ASSEY: NETWORK OPERATORS HAVE INCENTIVE TO DISCRIMINATE
[SOURCE: C-Net|News.com, AUTHOR: Anne Broache]
At Pike & Fischer's 2nd annual Broadband Policy Summit, James Assey,
Jr., Democratic counsel to the Senate Commerce Committee, said of
possible new Network Neutrality laws, "I'm not sure that we see
anything wrong with setting up some rules of the road that will make
sure everyone plays fair." He indicated that Senate Commerce
Committee Co-Chairman Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) is concerned about
laissez-faire rules proposed by Sen Ted Stevens. "I don't view this
as new regulation of the Internet. In fact, I view it as reaffirming
what has been a very old principle... that network operators with an
ability and incentive to discriminate be prevented from doing so."
http://news.com.com/Democratic+senator+wants+Net+neutrality+regulations/...

SENATE COMMERCE STICKING WITH BIG BILL
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Stevens still plans to stick
with a comprehensive approach to a Senate telecommunications reform
bill, despite rumblings that too many cooks could spoil the broth.
Unlike the House bill, which is pretty much confined to revising the
video franchising system to make it easier for telcos and others to
compete with cable and satellite, the Senate version goes beyond a
slightly less national take on video franchise reform to collecting
more money from industry for the rollout of communications services
to rural areas (Stevens represents Alaska), permits municipal
broadband networks to compete with commercial ones, allows unlicensed
wireless devices to operate in the broadcast band, lets cable convert
a DTV signal to analog after the broadcasters have to convert to DTV,
and more. Top Verizon executive Tom Tauke pointed out Tuesday that
time was running out in this session to pass telecom reform and that
the best chance was a bill reduced to only franchise reform and
funding rural rollouts (via the Universal Service Fund). But a Senate
Commerce staffer said the Senator remained committed to a wide
ranging bill that deals with some of the issues that had to be
stripped from a DTV hard date-bill late last year to square with
parliamentary rules.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6333086?display=Breaking+News

TELECOM FOES STEP UP PROTEST
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
The Manhattan Neighborhood Network, which administers the public
access cable TV channels in New York, is taking its protest of new
video franchise reform to the steps of City Hall. The group claims
that the bill dismantles channels like the ones it oversees, strips
the city of oversight for protection of customers and rights of way,
and will create a "tiered 'pay-as-you-go' Internet system," among
other things. As a result, it is supporting a city council
resolution, introduced by a number of councils members, opposing the
House and Senate telecom bills and urging the New York congressional
delegations to do likewise. The resolution had 10 principle
co-sponsors at press time.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6333061?display=Breaking+News
* For more info see http://mnn.org/saveaccess/index.html
See also: http://www.savetheinternet.com/

MCCAIN A LA CARTE BILL EXPECTED SOON
[SOURCE: The Hill, AUTHOR: Alexander Bolton]
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) is planning to introduce legislation on cable
television programming that is expected to put him at odds with
several of the nation's largest Christian television networks and
could complicate his effort to woo social conservatives for the 2008
presidential election. Specifically, Sen McCain is expected to unveil
a bill this week that would give cable companies regulatory
incentives to offer their customers content on a channel-by-channel
basis, which is known as "a la carte" programming because of its
resemblance to restaurant menus that price entrees and side orders
separately. But large Christian broadcasters are strongly opposed to
the approach because they fear that many consumers will skip over
their channels when custom-ordering a cable programming package.
Religious programming, they concede privately, though good for you,
is not always the most enticing fare -- at least for many consumers.
The Christian broadcasters opposed to McCain's approach, such as the
Christian Broadcasting Network and "The Old-Time Gospel Hour," are
affiliated with powerful conservative leaders such as the Rev. Pat
Robertson and the Rev. Jerry Falwell, respectively.
http://www.hillnews.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/051006/new...

INTERNET/BROADBAND

EARTHLINK: BELLS MUST SHARE BROADBAND NETWORKS
[SOURCE: C-Net|News.com, AUTHOR: Anne Broache]
In oral arguments before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C.
Circuit, Internet service provider EarthLink said the Federal
Communications Commission acted illegally by not forcing the Bell
companies to share their broadband networks with competitors. The FCC
ruled in 2004 to exempt Verizon, BellSouth, Qwest and what was then
SBC Communications from a portion of the Telecommunications Act of
1996 that generally requires such incumbent carriers to "unbundle,"
or share, certain broadband elements of their networks with potential
new competitors. The law allows the FCC to grant "forbearance" from
those requirements if it determines that governmental intervention
isn't needed to ensure "just, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory
charges and practices," to protect consumers and to promote the
public interest. Regulators are supposed to weigh the state of
competition in the marketplace before coming to that conclusion.
EarthLink lawyer Mark O'Connor built his arguments around the idea
that federal regulators "failed to analyze the state of broadband in
a rational manner." He said the FCC ignored the market analysis
techniques suggested by federal law and, as a result, "unlawfully
eradicated the rights of broadband competitors to serve the public."
O'Connor also charged that the broadband market today is nothing more
than a duopoly run by the Bells and cable companies and suggested a
higher standard should be in place before exempting the Bells from
their legal requirements.
http://news.com.com/EarthLink+Bells+must+share+broadband+networks/2100-1...

PROPOSED RULE CHANGES WOULD TANGLE THE WEB
[SOURCE: Baltimore Sun 5/9, AUTHOR: Michael Socolow, University of Maine]
[Commentary] Why should you care about the net neutrality provisions
in pending telecom bills in Congress? Why should you care, if your
Internet fee isn't altered? Or if your Web surfing will (possibly) be
only minimally disrupted? You should care because any corporate
restriction on information gathering directly counters the original
purpose of the World Wide Web. The proposed new rules have received
surprisingly sparse media coverage. The new laws have economic,
political and social ramifications. There are several explanations
for the silence. The most probable is simply that because the laws
have strong bipartisan support in both houses of Congress, they do
not appear particularly newsworthy. The history of American
telecommunications regulation does not offer a promising model for
the future of net neutrality. In the late 1800s, Congress approved of
Western Union, America's telegraph monopoly, censoring the Associated
Press. The 1934 Communications Act resulted in political discussion
over the national airwaves being tightly moderated by CBS and NBC.
Most telecom laws are sold to the public as the "natural evolution"
of communications technology. Yet there is no truly natural evolution
to our telecommunications laws. Only very rarely is regulation
completely ordained by physics or technological limits. More
commonly, it emerges from the political process. This is news to many
Americans unaware of their own media history. Many people believe the
Internet's decentralized structure guarantees that no company or
oligopoly could control it. Internet censorship - whether by
corporate or state interests - simply sounds impossible. Yet not only
is it theoretically possible, but the history of telecommunications
regulation tells us it is probable. By the time the telecoms start
changing what you see on your screen, it will be too late to complain.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.internet09may09,0,4...
See also --
* Tech Allies Split On 'Net Neutrality'
[SOURCE: Technology Daily, AUTHOR: Drew Clark]
http://www.njtelecomupdate.com/lenya/telco/live/tb-KFJT1147205296597.html

WHAT THE MISGUIDED HAVE MISSED REGARDING NETWORK NEUTRALITY
[SOURCE: The Conservative Voice, AUTHOR: Craig Fields, Gun Owners of America]
[Commentary] The concept of Network Neutrality has unfortunately been
misunderstood by many conservatives, libertarians, and other
champions of the free market. That's too bad, because the free market
essence of the Internet is exactly what would be lost without Network
Neutrality. In a truly free market, Network Neutrality would not be
necessary, as good old American competition would drive the very best
service up the ladder of success. But as long as government is
setting the rules for a handful of companies, the rules have to
include statutory Network Neutrality to ensure those companies can't
unilaterally shut down what the innovators are doing.
http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/14443.html
See also --
* Gun Owners Make Neutrality Case To Conservatives
The Gun Owners of America sent out an op-ed piece to conservative
news outlets Monday explaining why it has teamed with the bane of the
far right, Moveon.org, in the fight for network neutrality.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6333151?display=Breaking+News

KEEP THE INTERNET FREE, FAST
[SOURCE: The Miami Herald, AUTHOR: Chellie Pingree, Common Cause]
[Commentary] A two-tiered Internet would put small businesses,
nonprofits, entrepreneurs, political candidates and local governments
at a significant disadvantage and stifle the innovation that has
brought us Google, eBay, the blogosphere, instant messaging and so
much more. Failure to preserve net neutrality now would open the door
to allowing Internet service providers to discriminate against
websites and services that can't or won't pay for access to the
''fast lane.'' If network providers are allowed to control the flow
of information, the open and freewheeling nature of the Internet
could be lost. Why is Common Cause so concerned about a
telecommunications bill? COPE threatens the potential of the Internet
to spur citizen engagement in their democracy. We know how democratic
discourse has benefited from this technological marvel. In 2004,
according to the Pew Internet and American Life Project, 63 million
Americans went online for political news. An estimated seven million
individuals asked for e-mail updates from candidates, and four
million donated money online to parties and campaigns. That
involvement is only growing. Millions of citizens access information
from advocacy websites ranging from Amnesty International to the
National Rifle Association. And e-activists are transforming the way
citizens communicate with their elected officials and have their
opinions heard on the most pressing issues of the day. But this
renaissance will be cut short if access to the Internet is determined
by corporations more interested in selling goods and entertainment
than in encouraging democratic discourse. So far, this is a message
that our elected officials have not heard. Indeed, Rep. Fred Upton,
R-Mich., one of the bill's sponsors, predicted that COPE would win
next week in the House by a majority of 280 or 290 votes. If that
prediction comes true, our democracy will be the poorer for it.
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/opinion/14532935.htm?template=...

US TO AUCTION FREQUENCIES FOR IN-FLIGHT INTERNET USE
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Ken Belson]
Many fliers look forward to boarding planes so they can get away from
their phones and e-mail. That sanctuary will inch one step closer to
oblivion today when the Federal Communications Commission begins to
auction off frequencies for in-flight Internet service. Nine
companies, including Verizon Airfone, which pioneered pay phones in
the air, are expected to enter bids for the two licenses available.
The companies have developed a variety of technologies that
effectively create wireless networks on planes so fliers can use
their laptops to surf the Web or to make calls with
voice-over-Internet technology. The auction will not advance the
on-board use of conventional cellphones, which use other frequencies
and are still prohibited in the air. The winners of the auction,
which could take several days to complete, would still have to
persuade financially pressed American carriers to install their
equipment. They would also have to figure out whether and how to
divide the revenue that the technology may generate.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/10/technology/10spectrum.html
(requires registration)

PLAN FOR ADULT AREA SPARKS A FIGHT ON CONTROL OF WEB
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Christopher Rhoads
christopher.rhoads( at )wsj.com]
Stuart Lawley wants to create a new Internet neighborhood for the
adult-entertainment industry: dot-xxx. The 43-year-old British
entrepreneur believes the new three-letter ending for Web-site
addresses would help protect children from online pornography, by
making it easier to filter such material. He also hopes to make a
pile of money by collecting fees for registering dot-xxx sites. The
matter, which could be voted on as early as today by the organization
that governs domain names, has triggered a rancorous global debate
involving freedom-of-speech advocates, child-protection groups,
adult-content providers, foreign governments and conservative
Christian groups. Mr. Lawley's proposal also raises thorny issues for
the U.S. government, which funded the creation of the Internet and
has long played a behind-the-scenes role in running it. As the
Internet grows as a place of business and a forum for exchanging
ideas, some have argued that it shouldn't be dominated by any one
country. That discontent has prompted a few countries and regions to
begin breaking away and forming their own Internet-like computer
networks -- a threat to the universality that makes the Internet such
a powerful tool. The Commerce Department has expressed reservations
about the dot-xxx measure, amid a flood of email from conservative
groups, according to internal government documents reviewed by The
Wall Street Journal. In one document, the department made clear that
it could block the proposal if the domain-name organization, called
the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, or Icann,
approves it. As a result of the concerns, Icann has postponed several
scheduled votes since last August.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB114722804052548561.html?mod=todays_us_pa...
(requires subscription)

QUICKLY

VERIZON FIELDS OFFERS FOR PHONE LINES
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Dionne Searcey
dionne.searcey( at )wsj.com and Dennis K. Berman]
Verizon is fielding offers for two big packages of traditional
telephone lines that could have a combined value of up to $8 billion,
say people familiar with the matter. The possible sales are part of
the New York-based phone giant's strategy to delve deeper into the
wireless and broadband arenas, while getting out of the traditional
phone business in U.S. areas that aren't slated for fiber upgrades --
which allow the company to sell more Internet-based services -- and
therefore are less valuable to the company in the long run. But so
far Verizon's past efforts to sell systems have had limited results.
The latest possible deals include a package of access lines in three
entire states: Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine. These 1.6 million
lines could carry a value of some $2 billion to $3 billion, people
say. Verizon also has been shopping a package dubbed "GTE North" that
comprises about 3.4 million access lines in former GTE Corp.
territories in Indiana, Illinois, Ohio and Michigan. Two people
familiar with the matter said they could have a value of $4 billion
to $5 billion. The identities of the prospective buyers couldn't be
learned. But they might include smaller phone companies such as
CenturyTel and Citizens Communications. Some expect the lines in New
England to be shed before those in the Great Lakes states based on
the interest of potential buyers.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB114722393158348471.html?mod=todays_us_ma...
(requires subscription)

OKLAHOMA TELCOS DON'T NEED VIDEO FRANCHISES
[SOURCE: Multichannel News, AUTHOR: Linda Haugsted]
Telecos are doing so well in the states, why do they need federal
legislation anyway? Oklahoma telephone companies do not have to
obtain separate municipal franchises to use the public rights-of-way
to deliver video services, according to an opinion rendered by that
state's attorney general. The official, Drew Edmondson, issued the
opinion May 3 in response to questions submitted to him by Rep.
Dennis Adkins (R-Tulsa), chairman of the state House Energy & Utility
Regulatory Committee. AT&T asked the lawmaker to seek clarification
of state law.
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6333233.html?display=Breaking+News

CABLEVISION: DEREG IN MASSAPEQUA PARK
[SOURCE: Multichannel News, AUTHOR: Ted Hearn]
Cablevision Systems Corp. is asking the Federal Communications
Commission to remove price controls on a system in a Long Island
community where Verizon Communications Inc. has launched a
competitive pay TV service. If the FCC grants Cablevision's request,
the Village of Massapequa Park, N.Y., would be barred from capping
Cablevision's basic-tier rate and from requiring the company to
market a uniform rate structure to all 7,400 village households.
Another rule that would go away is the FCC's tier-buy-through
requirement, which bars cable companies not facing effective
competition from requiring consumers to buy one or more tiers above
basic in order to purchase pay-per-view or premium channels. In
theory, rate regulation is considered a proxy for competition. Where
competition is demonstrated, the FCC is authorized to remove various
restrictions on incumbent cable operators.
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6333310.html?display=Breaking+News

THINK TANK BLOG QUOTES INTERNAL VERIZON MEMO WITHOUT ATTRIBUTION
[SOURCE: Ars Technica, AUTHOR: Nate Anderson]
[Commentary] Adam Thierer, the director of the Center for Digital
Media Freedom at The Progress & Freedom Foundation (a free-market
think tank) used verbatim and without attribution quotes from a
Verizon memo circulated to company consultants, who are hitting the
pavement to let Wall Street hear its side of the Net Neutrality
story. Why would he do that? When you look at the PFF's list of
supporters, a possible answer emerges. Sponsors include Verizon,
AT&T, BellSouth, Comcast, Qwest, and the National Cable &
Telecommunications Association. Verizon executives have attended
several PFF conferences, and Common Cause claims that the group wants
only to "advance the bottom line interests of their corporate
sponsors on a variety of telecom and media issues." Whether that's
true or not, this example nicely illustrates the web of relationships
purchased by major industry groups in the hope of influencing public
policy for their best interests. The goal is to make it look as
though pressure on an issue is coming from many different directions
(not just from the company's lobbyists), and the more "independent" a
source appears, the better.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060509-6785.html
--------------------------------------------------------------
Communications-related Headlines is a free online news summary
service provided by the Benton Foundation (www.benton.org). Posted
Monday through Friday, this service provides updates on important
industry developments, policy issues, and other related news events.
While the summaries are factually accurate, their often informal tone
does not always represent the tone of the original articles.
Headlines are compiled by Kevin Taglang headlines( at )benton.org -- we
welcome your comments.
--------------------------------------------------------------