December 2012

BENTON'S COMMUNICATIONS-RELATED HEADLINES for FRIDAY, DECEMBER 14, 2012

WCIT wraps up and the FCC’s Emergency Access Advisory Committee meets http://benton.org/calendar/2012-12-14/

WCIT UPDATE
   UN Telecom Treaty Approved Amid U.S. Web-Censorship Concerns
   Statement from Dr Hamadoun I. Touré, Secretary General of the ITU - press release
   WCIT-12 Enshrines Environmental Sustainability in Global ICT treaty - press release
   US refuses to back U.N. treaty, saying it endorses restricting the Internet
   Sorting out the past 36 hours at the WCIT - analysis
   U.N Internet treaty looks like a disaster - editorial [links to web]
   Vint Cerf: The Internet doesn't need the ITU's help
   Tech groups sound alarm over U.N. Internet resolution [links to web]
   Should the U.N. Really Be Starting a War on Spam? [links to web]
   Why the ITU is the wrong place to set Internet standards - analysis
   Internet turns U.N. telecoms talks into reality show

INTERNET/BROADBAND
   It’s Time to Fix the Pitifully Slow, Expensive Internet Access in the US - op-ed
   Seattle is latest city to go around ISPs to get a gigabit network
   Democrats watching court on network neutrality rules [links to web]
   FCC’s Rosenworcel: Promoting Confidence for Investment, Promoting Confidence for Consumers - speech [links to web]

MEDIA OWNERSHIP
   Why Is the FCC Fighting the Coalition of the Ascendant? - op-ed
   Coalition Says Lifting Ban on Media Consolidation Hits Hard on Minority Ownership
   Why it still matters that FCC may loosen media ownership rules - analysis
   Memo to FCC: Let broadcasters invest in newspapers - op-ed
   FTC Commissioner Brill: FTC hopes to resolve Google probe soon [links to web]
   Owners of Southern California dailies eye Tribune papers [links to web]

SPECTRUM/WIRELESS
   New Airwave-Sharing Scheme Will Launch a Wireless Revolution
   Sprint Offers to Buy Rest of Clearwire
   Here’s Why Sprint Offered to Buy Clearwire - analysis
   Sprint Isn't Yet in the Clearwire - analysis [links to web]
   Softbank caps Sprint's Clearwire bid; investors want more
   T-Mobile completes iPhone-friendly Upgrade in 23 cities [links to web]
   What we’ll see in 2013 in mobile [links to web]

PRIVACY
   US Terrorism Agency to Tap a Vast Database of Citizens
   Senate Judiciary Committee approves Franken's location privacy bill
   Are Digital Foxes Guarding the Web's Privacy Hen House? - analysis [links to web]
   No data-mining on kids - editorial [links to web]
   Microsoft Rankles Advertisers With Web User-Privacy Plan [links to web]
   Gigya Rolls Out Privacy Seal For Sites With Social Log-Ins [links to web]

TELEVISION
   Users Prefer Mobile Video At Home [links to web]
   CALM law regulating TV commercial volume takes effect [links to web]

EDUCATION
   Educational apps alone won't teach your kid to read - op-ed [links to web]

PATENTS
   Commissioner Julie Brill defends FTC’s patent policing [links to web]
   Jury says Apple iPhone violated three patents, damages unclear [links to web]
   Apple, LG Electronics Defeat Alcatel-Lucent Patent Claims [links to web]

POLICYMAKERS
   Chairman Takes Aim At FCBA Dinner [links to web]
   FCC Begins Search for Health Care Director and Launches New Health Website - press release [links to web]

STORIES FROM ABROAD
   China party chief stresses reform, censors relax grasp on Internet [links to web]
   In Europe, Publishers Dealt a Setback Over e-Book Pricing [links to web]
   Did Google pay Belgian newspapers a $6 Million Copyright fee? Sure looks like it - analysis [links to web]
   The world’s best paid content market? China [links to web]
   Canadian Supreme Court: CRTC Lacks Authority to Impose Retransmission [links to web]
   EU report urges action against Chinese telecom firms [links to web]

MORE ONLINE
   The Man Looking to Turn Samsung into a Silicon Valley Trendsetter [links to web]
   Social Media Becomes A Major [links to web]

back to top

WCIT UPDATE

UN TELECOM TREATY APPROVED
[SOURCE: Bloomberg, AUTHOR: Amy Thomson]
An agreement to update 24-year-old United Nations telecommunications rules was approved against the opposition of countries including the U.S. and the U.K., whose officials walked out on the talks on concerns about Internet regulation and censorship. The new pact includes measures that would give countries a right to access international telecommunications services and the ability to block spam, which delegations declining to sign the amended text argued would pave the way for government censorship and control over the Web. Canada, Denmark, Australia, Norway, Costa Rica, Serbia, Greece, Finland and others followed the U.S. in refusing to sign on these grounds. The countries who won’t sign the new treaty will continue to be bound by the 1988 version, said Sarah Parkes, a spokeswoman for the International Telecommunication Union. Other articles that were passed address changes in the way telecommunications companies should be taxed and compensated in a system that has moved from phone companies that were largely government-owned monopolies to one with private mobile-phone companies. They also address access to communications for people with disabilities and in less developed markets. “It’s with a heavy heart and a sense of missed opportunity that the U.S. must communicate that it’s not able to sign the agreement in its current form,” the U.S. delegation said in a statement at the plenary after the final changes were adopted last night. “We candidly cannot support an ITU treaty that is inconsistent with the multi-stakeholder model.”
benton.org/node/141695 | Bloomberg
Recommend this Headline
back to top

STATEMENT FROM WCIT
[SOURCE: International Telecommunication Union, AUTHOR: ITU Secretary General Hamadoun Touré]
We have concluded the drafting of the text for the newly revised International Telecommunication Regulations treaty. This treaty contains many gains and achievements including increased transparency in international mobile roaming charges and competition, an extremely important win for consumers. The treaty contains a newly updated Article which will promote greater connectivity for people with disabilities as well as a new Resolution covering Land-Locked Developing Nations and Small Island Developing States. This Resolution will set the framework for increased investment and roll out of broadband and mobile broadband, bringing vital services to populations that are currently disconnected. Information and communication technologies can now play a greater role in driving sustainable development, in particular with new Articles that provide recommendations for dealing with the growing scourge of e-waste and promoting greater energy efficiency. The conference did NOT include provisions on the Internet in the treaty text. Annexed to the treaty is a non-binding Resolution which aims at fostering the development and growth of the internet – a task that ITU has contributed significantly to since the beginning of the Internet era, and a task that is central to the ITU’s mandate to connect the world, a world that today still has two thirds of its population without Internet access. The new ITR treaty does NOT cover content issues and explicitly states in the first article that content-related issues are not covered by the treaty. Likewise, in the preamble of the new text signatory Member States undertake to renew their commitment and obligation to existing human rights treaties. History will show that this conference has achieved something extremely important. It has succeeded in bringing unprecedented public attention to the different and important perspectives that govern global communications. There is not one single world view but several, and these views need to be accommodated and engaged.
benton.org/node/141673 | International Telecommunication Union
Recommend this Headline
back to top

WCIT-12 ENSHRINES ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY IN GLOBAL ICT TREATY
[SOURCE: International Telecommunication Union, AUTHOR: Malcolm Johnson]
Delegates at WCIT-12 have sounded global agreement on the need for the next phase of ICT development to prioritize environmental sustainability, reaching consensus on the inclusion of a provision targeting “energy efficiency and e-waste” in drafts of what will become 2012’s set of International Telecommunication Regulations (ITRs). A provision of Article 8 encourages Member States to cooperate in adopting best-practice energy efficiency and e-waste policies, regulations and business practices. In the language of what will soon be an international treaty, “Member States are encouraged to adopt energy efficiency and e-waste best practices taking into account relevant ITU-T Recommendations.”
benton.org/node/141623 | International Telecommunication Union
Recommend this Headline
back to top

US REFUSES TO SIGN TREATY
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Ellen Nakashima]
The Obama Administration announced that it will refuse to sign a United Nations treaty under consideration at a major global telecommunications conference because of provisions that it says would give a UN stamp of approval to state censorship and regulation of the Internet and private networks. “The United States has announced today that it cannot sign” the treaty’s provisions “in their current form,” said Terry Kramer, the U.S. ambassador to the World Conference on International Telecommunications, as the 12-day conference draws to a close. Representatives of several other of the world’s largest economies also spoke out against the treaty, causing it to collapse for all practical purposes. International Telecommunication Union officials had said earlier that the meeting, the agency’s first major review of a telecommunications agenda since 1988, was not going to be a referendum on Internet freedom. But late Dec 12, according to Administration officials, the conference chairman, Mohamed Nasser al-Ghanim, director general of the Telecommunications Regulation Authority of the United Arab Emirates, inserted a resolution in the treaty that broke open the deep divisions between the countries on Internet regulation. The U.S. delegation is concerned with measures that would give governments new authority to regulate spam on their Internet networks. U.S. officials fear that states could use that provision to monitor and silence dissidents and others under the auspices of U.N. approval. “One man’s spam is another man’s political speech,” said one administration official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, lacking the authority to discuss the matter on the record. The Americans also opposed expanding the definition of what the treaty covers from public telecommunications networks to any network, public or private, including Internet service providers and government systems. They also were concerned about efforts to include network security in the treaty.
ITU Secretary General Hamadoun I. Touré rejected the United States’ characterization of the treaty. “The new . . . treaty does NOT cover content issues and explicitly states in the first article that content-related issues are not covered by the treaty,” he said.
House Commerce Committee Republicans commended Ambassador Terry Kramer, Ambassador Philip Verveer and the rest of the U.S. Delegation’s decision not to sign an treaty that would expand the role for the UN on Internet issues. Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-CA) also commended “the hard work of our talented U.S. delegation led by Ambassadors Verveer and Kramer. The U.S. government is united with many other ITU member countries, industry, and leaders in civil society across the globe in supporting a free and open Internet. The United States has made no apologies for advancing this clear position, and I applaud this Administration for defending these core principles in Dubai. Though the WCIT negotiations have concluded, we must continue to engage with other countries and international stakeholders through the multi-stakeholder process to advance our shared goal of a free and open Internet accessible to all.“
Federal Communications Commission member Robert McDowell said, “As egregious as today’s action was, many of the anti-freedom proposals were turned back - but the worst is yet to come. The United States should immediately prepare for an even more treacherous ITU treaty negotiation that will take place in 2014 in Korea. Those talks could expand the ITU’s reach even further. Accordingly, Internet freedom’s allies everywhere should more than redouble their efforts to erase the damage that was wrought today. Freedom and prosperity are at stake. Let’s never be slow to respond again. Freedom’s foes are patient and persistent incrementalists. They will never give up. Nor should we.”
benton.org/node/141672 | Washington Post | House Commerce Committee | Rep Waxman | Commissioner McDowell | The Hill | Politico | WSJ | Multichannel News | Reuters | ars technica | BBC
Recommend this Headline
back to top

WCIT UPDATE
[SOURCE: Public Knowledge, AUTHOR: Gigi Sohn]
[Commentary] Anyone following the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT) over the last 36 hours knows this has become a moment of high drama around the International Telecommunications regulations (ITRs) and the role of the ITU for internet-related issues. Unfortunately, that is probably the only thing anyone can say for certain. Even the member states on the ground have expressed confusion on critical matters, such as whether the widely reported “vote” on a resolution that included express language relating to the internet was really a vote or not. Public Knowledge does not want to pre-judge any final outcomes while everyone remains in negotiation and debate. We are also mindful that the 8 hour time difference between Washington, DC, and the conference in Dubai, and the incredible speed with which events keep unfolding, has made us hesitate to say anything. But at this critical juncture we need to emphasize some important points.
First, we continue to urge the ITU members to reject any version of the ITRs or any resolutions that would expand the scope of the ITU to Internet governance or Internet services.
Second, we want to emphasize that nothing is gained for anyone if the conference resorts to dubious procedures.
benton.org/node/141622 | Public Knowledge
Recommend this Headline
back to top

CERF ON WCIT
[SOURCE: IDG News Service, AUTHOR: Joab Jackson]
Work under way to draft new regulations at the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT) in Dubai this week could harm the Internet, warned Internet pioneer and Google executive Vint Cerf. "The Internet is under threat" from proposals at the WCIT, Cerf said at the Usenix LISA (Large Installation System Administration) conference in San Diego. The Internet is not controlled by any one nation and the best way to deal with issues that arise continues to be through informal agreements among interested parties, he argued. The purpose of the WCIT is to update the agreements guiding the United Nations' International Telecommunications Union (ITU). In keeping these regulations up-to-date, though, it may attempt to extend the reach of ITU over the Internet. "The natural reaction of any institution that wants to preserve its existence is to reach out for new territory," Cerf said of the ITU.
benton.org/node/141620 | IDG News Service
Recommend this Headline
back to top

WHY ITU IS WRONG PLACE TO SET INTERNET STANDARDS
[SOURCE: ars technica, AUTHOR: Timothy Lee]
The International Telecommunication Union as an organization doesn't have any direct regulatory powers. It can't fine anyone or put them in jail for defying its rules. Moreover, the proposals under discussion at Dubai, a proposal by the ITU's chairman, don't give the Geneva-based ITU Secretariat new powers. They merely declare that "member states" shall have the power to regulate the Internet to promote security, fight spam, and so forth. But the "member states" are sovereign nations. They've been regulating the Internet for years without the ITU's blessing and are going to continue doing so regardless of what is decided at the conclusion of this week's conference. So why is there so much controversy over a treaty that will largely say governments have powers they're already wielding? A big reason is that in the Internet's consensus-based governance model, precedents and symbolism matter. The ITU can't force the world's governments to sign on to, or abide by, any treaty that's negotiated in Dubai this week. But if the world signs on to a treaty that purports to govern the Internet, it will help establish a precedent that the ITU is the appropriate forum for setting Internet standards. The Internet already has standard-setting organizations that are inclusive and transparent, inviting participation from private companies, non-profits, and others with a stake in the Internet's future. The Internet's existing consensus-based standards-setting process works well. In contrast, the ITU's deliberations are largely carried out behind closed doors, with only governments and major telecommunications incumbents invited to participate. There's no danger of a "UN takeover" of the Internet in the short term. But in the long run the ITU could emerge as a rival to the Internet's established standard-setting institutions. And that could harm the open Internet by politicizing the development of future Internet standards.
benton.org/node/141670 | Ars Technica
Recommend this Headline
back to top

WCIT AS REALITY SHOW
[SOURCE: Reuters, AUTHOR: Leila Abboud, Matt Smith]
If the 1,500 delegates huddled into a Dubai conference center to thrash out a new global telecommunications treaty didn't know how it felt to be on a reality TV show, they do now. The high-level diplomats and regulators from 150 countries have been criticized, mocked and - just occasionally - lauded by an online commentariat following proceedings at the U.N.'s World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT). Predictably, many of the bloggers and tweeters have taken aim at those seeking to tame the online world, as a battle rages between the United States and its allies, which want no mention of the Internet in regulations, and a Russia-led block which is calling for a more active role for governments. But there's also criticism of the way the United Nations goes about its business, with a Wikileaks-inspired website -dubbed WCITleaks - spawned to shine a light on what it considers the conference's opaqueness.
benton.org/node/141664 | Reuters
Recommend this Headline
back to top

INTERNET/BROADBAND

TIME TO FIX US BROADBAND
[SOURCE: Wired, AUTHOR: Susan Crawford]
[Commentary] Bottom line: For $30 a month, we must be able to provide high-speed internet access to every American. This fiber connection service should include voice, data, and basic broadcast channels at speeds that meet global standards. It’s embarrassing that one of the most innovative nations in the world can’t do this. And if private providers don’t want to do it, local and federal government needs to undertake this infrastructure investment. We need to build fiber rings around every U.S. town and city. Yet we’re moving in the opposite direction. Both Verizon and AT&T have refused to take subsidies from the Federal Communications Commission aimed at ensuring rural service. The reason? They’re worried about regulatory oversight that might follow from taking the money, and they’d rather focus on wireless. More troubling, though, is the perspective – espoused by the giant telecommunications companies – that it’s “our wires, our rules”.
benton.org/node/141663 | Wired
Recommend this Headline
back to top

SEATTLE GIGABIT NETWORK
[SOURCE: GigaOm, AUTHOR: Stacey Higginbotham]
Seattle has teamed up with Gigabit Squared, a startup that wants to invest $200 million in building gigabit broadband networks in six college towns around the country, to build a gigabit network. Seattle, which has its own city-owned dark fiber network, and Gigabit Squared have signed a Memorandum of Understanding and a Letter of Intent that will allow Gigabit Squared to begin raising the capital needed to conduct engineering work and to build out the demonstration fiber network. There are three parts to the network, a fiber-to-home element that will reach 50,000 homes in 12 Seattle neighborhoods. The network will also take advantage of point-to-point wireless, which companies such as WebPass are using, as well as offer some kind of mobile broadband service as well.
This will be Gigabit Squared’s second fiber commitment under an arrangement it has with the Gig.U project headed by Blair Levin. Levin, who led the efforts to write the National Broadband Plan, formed Gig.U to make sure the U.S. maintains a competitive edge in broadband infrastructure. His idea is to build gigabit networks in U.S. college towns so students and researchers can keep up with the broadband speeds that other countries are developing. Gigabit Squared’s first commitment was in Chicago, which it announced in October.
"Leadership in the 21st century global information economy requires leadership in broadband networks, which is why Congress provided $4 billion to NTIA to invest in broadband projects nationwide," said Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information and NTIA Administrator Lawrence E. Strickling. "Seattle’s announcement today will give it a strategic bandwidth advantage, and we look forward to watching the city leverage its innovation-ripe environment for economic growth."
benton.org/node/141660 | GigaOm | NTIA Administrator Strickling
Recommend this Headline
back to top

MEDIA OWNERSHIP

WHY IS FCC FIGHTING THE COALITION OF THE ASCENDANT?
[SOURCE: National Journal, AUTHOR: Wade Henderson, Michael Copps]
[Commentary] The media keep telling us how changing demographics are profoundly reshaping our nation, and that businesses, political parties, and government must diversify to remain relevant. So why are the bearers of these truths—the same media—fighting tooth and nail to stay as homogenous as possible? The media-dubbed “coalition of the ascendant” of women and minorities has made historic gains in our nation, yet according to the Federal Communications Commission, these communities own only a pittance of the mainstream media. Apparently not satisfied with their grip on the market, media conglomerates are lobbying the FCC to allow even more consolidation in the industry, effectively shutting the door to the development of a media that’s more reflective of our nation. Instead of promoting diversity in media ownership, the FCC is now preparing to vote for an order that would increase consolidation, allowing big media to own even more TV and radio stations and permitting TV stations and newspapers in more cities to combine under a single masthead. The very predictable result will be more shuttered newsrooms and even less diverse ownership. This is a far cry from the original broadcaster commitment to serve the public interest in return for free use of the people’s airwaves. If the FCC decides to cave to big media consolidation again and allow fewer companies to own our public airwaves, we will all be subject to lower quality local programming, a less competitive market environment, glitzy infotainment passed off as news, public airwaves that don’t really serve the public, and ultimately, a more distorted view of our country. The demographic shifts are real for the country; they’re real for business; they’re real for politics. It’s time for the FCC to recognize that they’re also real for the media.
[Wade Henderson is the president and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, a coalition of more than 200 national civil rights groups. Former FCC Commissioner Michael Copps leads the Media and Democracy Reform Initiative at Common Cause.]
benton.org/node/141610 | National Journal
Recommend this Headline
back to top

COALITION OPPOSES LIFTING MEDIA OWNERSHIP BAN
[SOURCE: National Journal, AUTHOR: Rosa Ramirez]
Minority-owned media remains “excruciatingly low,” and lifting a ban on companies owning newspapers and television stations in the same market would only make matters worse, civil-rights groups and political leaders argue. On Dec 10, several prominent minority members of the House were among 44 signatories on a letter urging a full study of the impact that lifting the ban might have on minority media ownership. Among the signers:
Civil-rights icon Rep. John Lewis (D-GA).
Congressional Black Caucus Chairman Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO).
Congressional Hispanic Caucus Chairman Rep. Charles Gonzalez (D-TX).
Cochairmen of the Congressional Progressive Caucus Reps. Keith Ellison (D-MN) and Raul Grijalva (D-AZ).
“While local broadcast media remain an important source of information for our constituents, these outlets often do not reflect the diversity of the communities they serve,” the letter said. “Women and people of color historically held very few licenses for radio and television stations, and these numbers remain shockingly low.”
benton.org/node/141659 | National Journal
Recommend this Headline
back to top

WHY MEDIA OWNERSHIP RULES STILL MATTER
[SOURCE: Tampa bay Times, AUTHOR: Eric Deggans]
In a world with hundreds of cable channels and thousands of websites, it must sound as quaint as talk about VHS players and Walkmans to worry about how many media outlets any one company gets to own. But even in a media landscape with countless options, the nation's biggest media companies also control our biggest TV stations, radio outlets and online destinations, wielding an influence that can be magnified far beyond the actual platforms they own. In the Tampa Bay market, just three companies — Clear Channel, CBS Radio and Cox Radio — own 20 radio stations, including the top 16 outlets reaching more than 80 percent of people listening in November's ratings period. And some of media's biggest websites, from the Huffington Post to the Drudge Report, are built around "aggregating" stories already reported by other news outlets, allowing the New York Times or Wall Street Journal to echo across a wider swath of the Internet than you might imagine.
benton.org/node/141657 | Tampa Bay Times
Recommend this Headline
back to top

LIFTING OWNERSHIP BAN
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Caroline Little]
[Commentary] Nearly four decades ago, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) feared that dominant newspapers would control all local news in their markets. So the FCC crafted a rule that prohibited investors from owning both a newspaper and a television or radio station in the same city. That policy, adopted in 1975, seems quaint going into 2013. To put the explosive growth of the Internet in context: In the first six months of this year, Google brought in more advertising revenue than all printed daily and Sunday newspapers and magazines in the United States combined. While online, TV and mobile-app markets are teeming with new players, newspapers can no longer be seen as dominant. Congress, the FCC and the Federal Trade Commission recently held hearings and workshops about how to support newspaper journalism as they grapple with the seismic changes in the digital marketplace. There is little the government can or should do to help newspapers, but one thing is clear: The FCC’s rule barring broadcast companies from making investments in newspapers hurts the publishing industry and should be repealed. This outdated rule prevents broadcast companies from investing in newspapers at a time when local journalism needs to be bolstered. It is time for the FCC to provide much-needed relief to the newspaper industry, which has labored under this ownership ban for far too many years. [Little is president and chief executive of the Newspaper Association of America]
benton.org/node/141691 | Washington Post
Recommend this Headline
back to top

SPECTRUM/WIRELESS

SPECTRUM SHARING
[SOURCE: Technology Review, AUTHOR: David Talbot]
Aiming to boost wireless bandwidth and innovation, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission is poised to recommend the biggest regulatory change in decades: one that allows a newly available chunk of wireless spectrum to be leased by different companies at different times and places, rather than being auctioned off to one high bidder. The step “is a critical milestone,” said David Tennenhouse, Microsoft’s vice president of technology policy, adding that it will not only release more spectrum but also enable “dynamic spectrum sharing that is particularly well suited for absorbing growing wireless data traffic.” Cisco Systems estimates that mobile data traffic will grow by a factor of 18 by 2016, and Bell Labs predicts it will increase by a factor of 25. Many more airwaves could eventually be shared with the help of cognitive radios, which sense available frequencies and shift between them. The move will open up a piece of spectrum in the 3.550 to 3.650 gigahertz band now used by radar systems. The move in effect allocates spectrum for another Wi-Fi—a technology that has had tremendous impact. But it is the sharing approach that represents a dramatic change in unleashing bandwidth.
benton.org/node/141615 | Technology Review
Recommend this Headline
back to top

SPRINT-CLEARWIRE
[SOURCE: Bloomberg, AUTHOR: Cornelius Rahn, Scott Moritz]
Sprint Nextel offered to acquire all of Clearwire in a $2.1 billion deal, ending a four-year joint venture that struggled to build a nationwide network capable of challenging Verizon Wireless and AT&T. Sprint, which already owns more than 50 percent of Clearwire, is seeking to acquire the remaining shares at $2.90 each, according to a regulatory filing. That’s 5.5 percent more than the stock’s closing price in New York Dec 12. Sprint proposed to provide interim financing of as much as $800 million to help keep the money-losing Clearwire afloat.
benton.org/node/141614 | Bloomberg | NYTimes | WashPost
Recommend this Headline
back to top

SPRINT-CLEARWIRE – WHY?
[SOURCE: GigaOm, AUTHOR: Stacey Higginbotham]
The rationale behind Sprint’s $2.1 billion deal for Clearwire is simple. Our growing demand for data means that mobile operators need the capacity on their networks to support their users. And that means they need spectrum. At the moment AT&T and Verizon have some of the best spectrum assets around, but even AT&T was trying to buy T-Mobile in order to get more airwaves. For Sprint, which is building out an LTE network later than its rivals, capacity is key. The company is trying to free up as much spectrum as possible by getting some of its older Nextel subscribers off its older iDEN network technology. But with its investment in Clearwire, Sprint has access to many megahertz of spectrum –albeit in a band that’s not as ideal as the 700 Mhz and AWS bands that AT&T and Verizon own. Clearwire has more than 100 Mhz of spectrum in many of its markets. That’s roughly a third as much as AT&T and Verizon have in many of theirs. This deal is far from done given that SoftBank would need to approve it as well as Clearwire’s board and the Federal Communications Commission. The faster Sprint closes the deal, though, the sooner it can start shift Clearwire’s focus away for its older WiMAX technology and on to new LTE networks.
benton.org/node/141612 | GigaOm | CNNMoney
Recommend this Headline
back to top

SOFTBANK CAPS SPRINT’S CLEARWIRE BID
[SOURCE: Reuters, AUTHOR: Nadia Damouni, Sinead Carew]
Sprint Nextel's $2.1 billion offer to buy out Clearwire appeared to be running into trouble, as some shareholders said they wanted more money while Softbank set a cap on how much Sprint could pay. Any deal would need approval by Softbank, which has agreed to buy 70 percent of Sprint for about $20 billion. Clearwire shareholders, who together hold about 7.6 percent of the company, criticized the Sprint offer, with some saying that the No. 3 U.S. wireless carrier should raise its bid to at least $5 per share. Holders of at least 24.8 percent of Clearwire's outstanding stock, other than Sprint, need to approve the deal. But Softbank has told Sprint that it would not consent to any Clearwire bid higher than $2.97 per share, two sources close to the matter said. The threshold is the same price that Sprint recently paid to buy a small stake from Clearwire founder Craig McCaw's Eagle River Holdings LLC.
benton.org/node/141688 | Reuters | Financial Times
Recommend this Headline
back to top

PRIVACY

PRIVACY AND TERRORISM
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Julia Angwin]
Top U.S. intelligence officials gathered in the White House Situation Room in March to debate a controversial proposal. Counterterrorism officials wanted to create a government dragnet, sweeping up millions of records about U.S. citizens—even people suspected of no crime. Through Freedom of Information Act requests and interviews with officials at numerous agencies, The Wall Street Journal has reconstructed the clash over the counterterrorism program within the administration of President Barack Obama. The debate was a confrontation between some who viewed it as a matter of efficiency—how long to keep data, for instance, or where it should be stored—and others who saw it as granting authority for unprecedented government surveillance of U.S. citizens. The rules now allow the little-known National Counterterrorism Center to examine the government files of U.S. citizens for possible criminal behavior, even if there is no reason to suspect them. That is a departure from past practice, which barred the agency from storing information about ordinary Americans unless a person was a terror suspect or related to an investigation. Now, NCTC can copy entire government databases—flight records, casino-employee lists, the names of Americans hosting foreign-exchange students and many others. The agency has new authority to keep data about innocent U.S. citizens for up to five years, and to analyze it for suspicious patterns of behavior. Previously, both were prohibited. Data about Americans "reasonably believed to constitute terrorism information" may be permanently retained.
benton.org/node/141692 | Wall Street Journal
Recommend this Headline
back to top

LOCATION PRIVACY PROTECTION ACT
[SOURCE: The Hill, AUTHOR: Brendan Sasso]
The Senate Judiciary Committee voted in favor of Sen. Al Franken's (D-MN) Location Privacy Protection Act. The bill would require companies to get a customer's consent before collecting or sharing mobile location data. It would also ban mobile applications that secretly monitor the user's location — a feature that Sen Franken said allows for stalking and enables domestic violence. Sen Franken noted that many apps already ask for users' permission before tracking them, but he said his bill is necessary to ensure that the practice is mandatory. Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT), Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and Tom Coburn (R-OK) did not attend the markup, but registered dissenting votes. Sen Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the panel's ranking Republican, said he still has concerns with the bill, but he agreed to move it forward. Sens. Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) also said they have some concerns with the language of the bill, but they said they would work with Sen Franken to improve the legislation. Sen Franken said he already worked on his bill for a year and a half, and added that he held extensive conversations with industry groups. But he said he would work with the other senators to address their concerns.
benton.org/node/141656 | Hill, The
Recommend this Headline
back to top