February 2009

DTV: Stations Try to Fill Digital Subchannels

The country's switchover from analog to digital broadcast signals brings with it a need for stations to program the digital subchannels created in the bandwidth space formerly occupied by their analog signals. Fortunately for stations, there are a lot of choices on the programming menu. Many stations have already opted for weather reports, movies and classic television shows to occupy the additional programming real estate created with digital subchannels, which take up much less space than analog channels. Some station groups already are carrying fresh content on their digital tiers. Digital subchannels offer stations the opportunity to wring additional revenue from existing assets. Given the slumping economy, broadcasters are eager to extract revenue wherever they can, and new channels represent more advertising inventory to sell. On the flip side, most subchannels aren't profitable yet, and they're one more thing for already busy station managers to manage.

Vuze calls for FCC probe of Cox Cable traffic management

Vuze, the media company that petitioned the Federal Communications Commission for an investigation of Comcast's peer-to-peer throttling practices is on the warpath once more. This time Vuze has set its sights on Cox Cable, which has made itself a pretty obvious target with its announcement in late January that it will classify P2P traffic in Kansas and Arkansas as "Non-Time Sensitive," and thus "tolerant of delay." Did somebody say P2P? Vuze attorney Jay Monahan speaks about the throttling to Vuze users on his blog, saying, "That includes all bittorrent applications, including your Vuze application. We take that personally, and think you should too." Monahan has asked for "close scrutiny by the FCC of Cox's activities affecting peer-to-peer traffic." Vuze is a bit sensitive to these practices because practically all the streaming content that it delivers comes via the kind of apps Cox says it will deprioritize.

Comcast defends itself against FCC's VoIP probe

The Federal Communications Commission's main sparring partner in the realm of network management has sent the agency a polite but chilly refutation of its suggestion that the company may allow its own VoIP service an advantage over others running through its pipes. Comcast says that the ISP giant doesn't give its Digital Voice product (CDV) "disparate" treatment over its High-Speed Internet (HSI) lines, because it doesn't route the application through those lines. "CDV is a service separate from Comcast's HSI service; it does not run over Comcast's HSI service," Comcast Vice President Kathryn A. Zachem wrote to the Commission on January 30. The FCC has shifted its focus from the cable company's network management practices to how it handles the many VoIP services running through its system. In mid-January the agency sent a letter to Comcast, asking it to justify its "disparate treatment of its own VoIP service as compared to that offered by other VoIP providers on its network." The missive observed that Comcast's own explanation of its new network management techniques discloses that, when the system is trying to manage congestion, a VoIP call might sound "choppy." This potential choppiness stands in contrast to Comcast's own VoIP product, a difference that Comcast explains on its FAQ Network Management page. CDV is a "separate facilities-based IP phone service," Comcast notes, and "is not affected" by the new network management techniques. We seek clarification, the FCC informed Comcast, on why the company has not clarified "the distinct effects that Comcast's new network management technique has on Comcast's VoIP offering versus those of its competitors."

EU media chief rules out Internet freedom law

European Union Telecoms Commissioner Viviane Reding said a EU law to reinforce freedom on the Internet would be unnecessary and put operators in a difficult position. Congress has drafted a Global Online Freedom Act. Some European Parliament members want the EU to follow suit, saying authoritarian nations are increasingly censoring the Web by blocking sites and intimidating users with "cyber police." Such actions violate human rights, the EU lawmakers say. The American law would promote freedom of expression on the Web and protect US companies from coercion to participate in repression. "Should the EU have specific legislation on Internet freedom? I am not convinced so far that hard law is the best way to deal with the challenge," Reding told a meeting in the European Parliament.

ISPs Conjoined With NebuAd Claim Innocence

Internet service providers facing a lawsuit for allegedly violating subscribers' privacy by working with behavioral targeting company NebuAd are asking the court to dismiss the cases against them. The broadband providers argue that they can't be sued for violating federal or state privacy laws if they didn't intercept any subscribers. In court papers filed late last week, they argue that NebuAd alone allegedly intercepted traffic, while they were merely passive participants in the plan.

Dell: Stimulus package can be improved

The economic stimulus package going through Congress has provisions that could start a trade war and fails to address US competitiveness, Dell's chairman and CEO Michael Dell said Tuesday. A provision requiring projects funded by the stimulus package to use U.S.-made equipment and materials could prompt complaints to the World Trade Organization and could lead other countries to erect trade barriers on U.S. products, said Michael Dell. "You run the risk of protectionism," Dell said at a Northern Virginia Technology Council event. "Trade wars are very, very dangerous, particularly in the economic situation we find ourselves in right now." Dell also told his audience that another major concern he has with the stimulus package is that it largely fails to address U.S. competitiveness with the rest of the world. Congress should focus more on improving the U.S. education system, cutting corporate tax rates, and allowing U.S. companies to hire foreign workers, he said.

States Want More Say In Broadband Stimulus

Regulators from the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) will be in Washington later this month to urge that states be given the responsibility of using federal funds to be earmarked for broadband deployment. The group, whose members come from state government agency regulators, will meet in Washington beginning Feb. 15, and the regulators are expected to press their requests at the time. The Obama administration has listed stepped-up deployment of broadband as an important part of its plan to help the economy. NARUC president Frederick Butler of New Jersey has asked Congress to ensure that states "play a lead role" in the deployment of broadband infrastructure investments. Noting that "states have every incentive to make certain the money is not wasted," Butler added that "states can assure efficient utilization and targeting of stimulus monies."

South Korea Throws Down Bandwidth Gauntlet: Universal 1Gbps by 2012

[Commentary] The most ambitious broadband plan for the US is 100Mbps by 2015. Koreans to Have 1Gbps by 2012. And this isn't just a vague promise. They've got a specific plan to generate roughly $25 billion in total investment by investing $1 billion in government dollars. Of course there are vast differences in the geography and marketplace in South Korea and the US. But the underlying truth still stands that they're leaving us in their dust because they have more vision, energy, and unity than we do. Plus we need to understand that since we are much bigger than a South Korea or Japan that even if we had a big plan in place it's going to take two or three times as long to wire our whole country. And we don't even have agreed upon goals let alone a plan on how to accomplish them!

Dear NYT: Rural America's Ready to be Wired Now!

[Commentary] Today there's a front-page article on NYTimes.com entitled: "Internet Money in Fiscal Plan: Wise or Waste?" While it attempts to present a balanced approach to the positive and negative reactions to the money put in the stimulus package for rural broadband, on some of the most crucial issues it's factually wrong. Take this quote: "And yet, supporters cannot simply wave away the potential pitfalls, including the fact that it will take at least until 2015 to spend all the money on infrastructure to deliver the service -- vastly limiting the stimulating punch." The only reasons why it would take that long to spend $9 billion on rural broadband is if government's slow in distributing grants or if the industry around next-generation broadband deployment can manufacture enough wire and electronics to keep up with demand.

Telecommunications Alliance Advocates Un-Served Communities to Get Broadband Stimulus Money

The Rural Telecommunications Alliance has sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) saying that while it supports the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, which passed the House last week, it wants the money for broadband to go first to un-served areas where there is no existing broadband provider. "We applaud the current safeguards which wisely target the funds for communities that have no current providers of broadband Internet service (i.e. un-served communities)," the group wrote. "These communities should be the first priority for any broadband deployment program. Only once broadband is deployed to each and every rural community should funds be made available for projects in where there is already one broadband provider is already operating (i.e. underserved communities)." The RTA, which represents a number of farm and rural groups, also said some of the broadband money (about $6 billion in the House version, $9 billion in the as-yet-unpassed Senate version), should go to programs aimed at subsidizing low-cost computers, saying the problem is adoption as well as deployment.

Benton

Search