March 31, 2015 (The Most Important Civil Rights Victory of the 21st Century)
BENTON'S COMMUNICATIONS-RELATED HEADLINES for TUESDAY, MARCH 31, 2015
Promoting Medical Technology Innovation – The Role of Wireless Test Beds https://www.benton.org/calendar/2015-03-31
INTERNET/BROADBAND
We Just Won One of the Most Important Civil Rights Victories of the 21st Century - editorial
Municipal Fiber and the Digital Divide: A Modest Proposal - op-ed
AT&T’s newest fiber customers to pay $40 more than Google Fiber users [links to web]
PRIVACY/SECURITY
FCC vs. FTC -- a new privacy turf war - analysis
NCTA-Backed Cybersecurity Bill Exits House Intelligence [links to web]
Why the House information-sharing bill could actually deter information sharing - analysis
The LEADS Act and cloud computing - Media Institute op-ed [links to web]
Before Edward Snowden Leaks, NSA Mulled Ending Phone Program
Pentagon Personnel Now Talking on 'NSA-Proof' Smartphones [links to web]
TELECOM
Steep Costs of Inmate Phone Calls Are Under Scrutiny
SPECTRUM/WIRELESS
T-Mobile Emerges a Wireless Auction Winner
OWNERSHIP
Google likely to prevail against Mississippi Attorney General's enormous subpoena, court says - analysis [links to web]
TELEVISION
Why the cable industry should fear Verizon’s streaming video app [links to web]
Defanging a Paper Tiger - NAB analysis [links to web]
OPEN GOVERNMENT
Regulators fret over FOIA reform bill [links to web]
GOP House Members Seek FCC Server Move Info
Senate to Investigate White House Role in Google's Antitrust Victory
RNC chair: Clinton e-mail actions may be 'criminal' [links to web]
POLICYMAKERS
Spotlight on Commerce: Anne Neville, Director, State Broadband Initiative, NTIA - press release [links to web]
INTERNET/BROADBAND
WE JUST WON ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT CIVIL RIGHTS VICTORIES OF THE 21ST CENTURY
[SOURCE: National Hispanic Media Coalition, AUTHOR: Alex Nogales]
[Commentary] We just won a historic victory, a critical step towards equality for Latinos in the digital age. Yet many American Latinos are unaware of this win and the tremendous potential it brings for us and our families to achieve full participation in the American Dream: better educations, better jobs, more financial stability and more political power. No, unfortunately, I am not talking about important and much needed reforms to education, immigration, criminal justice, and the other major issues before us today. But this victory has far reaching implications for the way we leverage our burgeoning political power in these kind of fights in the months and years to come. So what is this beautiful, mysterious victory? On February 26, the Federal Communications Commission voted to adopt “Network Neutrality” rules. These rules prohibit Internet service providers like Time Warner Cable, Verizon and AT&T from blocking certain Internet content or creating Internet fast lanes for a few wealthy companies, and slow lanes for the rest of us. From finding a doctor to finding your elected official, Network Neutrality is the key to opening doors. The FCC’s Network Neutrality decision ensures that those doors will remain open for Latinos and all Internet users.
benton.org/headlines/we-just-won-one-most-important-civil-rights-victories-21st-century | National Hispanic Media Coalition
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
MUNICIPAL FIBER AND THE DIGITAL DIVIDE: A MODEST PROPOSAL
[SOURCE: National League of Cities, AUTHOR: Angela Siefer, Bill Callahan]
[Commentary] The explosion of interest in community-owned fiber on the part of elected officials and technology leaders has created an opportunity that few have noticed: cities could leverage these investments to help lower the barriers to home Internet access that still keep low-income, less educated and older citizens out of the digital mainstream. This could be easily accomplished, at it would cost cities practically nothing. Here’s how: cities could allow neighboring households and community groups to share that terrific bandwidth -- and its cost -- by using community-owned fiber to power grassroots Wi-Fi networks. Almost all Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and community-owned fiber networks employ Terms of Service language that prohibits customers from extending their networks across property lines to share access with their neighbors. City-owned networks can expand the possibilities for affordable broadband access in disadvantaged neighborhoods simply by changing their Terms of Service to allow network sharing. There’s no technical reason why block clubs and community organizations in lower-income neighborhoods can’t use this same cheap, off-the-shelf technology to create truly affordable local broadband access, by sharing connections and costs among neighboring households. But unlike the people running apartment buildings, campgrounds and hotels, community residents will almost always find that Terms of Service restrict them from sharing bandwidth with their neighbors, at any price. Municipal broadband providers can solve this problem with the stroke of a pen, simply by allowing neighborhood account sharing in their Terms of Service. With a little effort, city leaders could take the next step: Working with neighborhood leaders and digital inclusion advocates to develop account-sharing models and policies that encourage smart, grassroots solutions to the affordable broadband problem at little or no public cost.
[Angela Siefer is a digital inclusion consultant and an adjunct fellow at the Pell Center at Salve Regina University. Bill Callahan is a Cleveland-based community organizer]
benton.org/headlines/municipal-fiber-and-digital-divide-modest-proposal | National League of Cities
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
PRIVACY/SECURITY
FCC VS. FTC -- A NEW PRIVACY TURF WAR
[SOURCE: Katy on the Hill, AUTHOR: Kathryn Bachman]
[Commentary] The Federal Communications Commission is about to muscle in on the Federal Trade Commission’s privacy turf and the FTC is pushing back. Since the 1999 Geocities case, the Federal Trade Commission has been the nation’s defacto privacy cop, bringing more than 150 privacy and data security cases. But the network neutrality order could make the FCC a much bigger player in privacy enforcement. When the FCC in February reclassified the Internet as a common carrier service, it expanded Title II’s strict privacy regulations that currently govern telephone services to Internet service providers and mobile providers. A little known provision in FTC law called the common carrier exemption gives the FCC exclusive authority over telephone services. Now that ISPs and mobile providers are common carriers, the FTC could be cut out of a broad swath of privacy enforcement, especially since much of the privacy and data security agita today stems from online and mobile practices. The FTC most recent enforcement actions -- TracFone, AT&T, and T-Mobile -- may be now out of bounds for the FTC, but fair game for the FCC. The only solution for the FTC is for Congress to change the common carrier exemption and the FTC is advocating that course.
benton.org/headlines/fcc-vs-ftc-new-privacy-turf-war | Katy on the Hill
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
BEFORE EDWARD SNOWDEN LEAKS, NSA MULLED ENDING PHONE PROGRAM
[SOURCE: Associated Press, AUTHOR: Ken Dilanian]
The National Security Agency considered abandoning its secret program to collect and store American calling records in the months before leaker Edward Snowden revealed the practice, current and former intelligence officials say, because some officials believed the costs outweighed the meager counterterrorism benefits. After the leak and the collective surprise around the world, NSA leaders strongly defended the phone records program to Congress and the public, but without disclosing the internal debate. The proposal to kill the program was circulating among top managers but had not yet reached the desk of Gen. Keith Alexander, then the NSA director, according to current and former intelligence officials who would not be quoted because the details are sensitive. Two former senior NSA officials say they doubt Alexander would have approved it. Still, the behind-the-scenes NSA concerns, which have not been reported previously, could be relevant as Congress decides whether to renew or modify the phone records collection when the law authorizing it expires in June. The internal critics pointed out that the already high costs of vacuuming up and storing the "to and from" information from nearly every domestic landline call were rising, the system was not capturing most cellphone calls, and program was not central to unraveling terrorist plots, the officials said. They worried about public outrage if the program ever was revealed.
benton.org/headlines/edward-snowden-leaks-nsa-mulled-ending-phone-program | Associated Press
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
PROTECTING CYBER NETWORKS ACT
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Stewart Baker]
[Commentary] The House Intelligence Committee has now adopted a manager’s amendment to what it’s now calling the “Protecting Cyber Networks Act.” Predictably, privacy groups are already inveighing against it. I fear that the House bill is indeed seriously flawed, but not because it invades privacy. Instead, it appears to pile unworkable new privacy regulations on the private sector information-sharing that’s already going on. The key point to remember is that plenty of private sector sharing about cybersecurity is already going on. There aren’t a lot of legal limits on such sharing, unless the government is getting access to the information. If it is, providers of Internet and telecommunications services can’t join the sharing because an old privacy law bars them from providing subscriber information to the government in the absence of a subpoena. The House bill solves that problem by allowing sharing to occur, “notwithstanding any other law.” But overriding even a dysfunctional and aging privacy law quickens the antibodies of the privacy lobby. So they’ve been pressing for kind of “privacy tax” on information sharing -- specifically, they want assurances that personal data will be removed from any threat information that companies share.
benton.org/headlines/why-house-information-sharing-bill-could-actually-deter-information-sharing | Washington Post
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
TELECOM
STEEP COSTS OF INMATE PHONE CALLS ARE UNDER SCRUTINY
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Timothy Williams]
After years of complaints from prison-rights groups and families of the incarcerated, the Federal Communications Commission is investigating the financial intricacies of the industry, which has been largely unregulated. At the core of the inquiry are the hundreds of millions of dollars in concession fees, known as commissions, paid by the phone companies to state and local prison systems in exchange for exclusive contracts. The fees help drive phone charges as high as $1.22 per minute, and the leading companies say they need to charge at least 20 cents per minute, compared with typical commercial rates of about 4 cents a minute. In 2013, a total of $460 million in concession fees was paid to jails and prisons, and to state, county and local governments, according to the FCC. The fees are legal, and they cover a range of expenses within prisons as well as outside. The agency is expected to rule in 2015 on whether to ban the concession fees and limit the costs of prison phone calls. An analysis released in 2013 by the FCC said the fees “have caused inmates and their friends and families to subsidize everything from inmate welfare to salaries and benefits, states’ general revenue funds and personnel training.” It added, “The companies compete not based on price or service quality, but on the size of the commission.” The possibility of eliminating the fees has met fierce opposition from prisons and jails, sheriff’s departments and local officials. Some law enforcement groups have said changes could stoke inmate violence against prison guards because there might be less money for security.
benton.org/headlines/steep-costs-inmate-phone-calls-are-under-scrutiny | New York Times
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
SPECTRUM/WIRELESS
T-MOBILE AND AT&T’S SPECTRUM
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Thomas Gryta]
Maybe T-Mobile USA was a big winner in the recently completed government wireless auction after all -- with AT&T picking up the bill. The record $45 billion in bids pushed up the market value of “mid-band” spectrum, a category that includes the airwaves AT&T turned over to rival T-Mobile in 2012 as part of the breakup fee for their failed merger. The breakup fee was one of the costliest ever. AT&T took a $4 billion charge, covering the $3 billion in cash it paid T-Mobile and the $1 billion book value of the spectrum it surrendered. Today, the cost looks even worse in light of the higher estimated values for mid-band spectrum. Analysts at New Street Research LLP estimates that same spectrum is worth $4.7 billion in the wake of the auction, putting the current value of the cash and airwaves AT&T gave away near a staggering $8 billion.
benton.org/headlines/t-mobile-emerges-wireless-auction-winner | Wall Street Journal
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
OPEN GOVERNMENT
GOP HOUSE MEMBERS SEEK FCC SERVER MOVE INFO
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
House Commerce Committee Republican leaders want the Federal Communications Commission to better explain why it is moving servers off-site to a multi-agency facility in West Virginia. In a March 4 hearing, FCC managing director Jon Wilkins explained in a graphic accompanying his written testimony that the commission was moving "over 200 on-premise, antiquated servers occupying expensive downtown real estate to a 100 off-premise, cloud-based deployment in a secure multi-agency facility" and told the legislators that the FCC had just signed a contract to start moving the servers. In the letter to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler dated March 27, the legislators asked for a copy of that contract, information on how the contract was awarded, what steps the FCC had taken to make sure it did not lose any info in the move and more. They want the answers and information by April 10. "Given the committee's strong interest in the manner in which the commission is managing its own information technologies, we are writing to seek information to better understand the facts and circumstances surrounding the planned relocation of these servers and the impact, if any, such relocation may have on the FCC's document management practices." Signing the letter were Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI), House Communications subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden (R-OR), and House Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Tim Murphy (R-PA).
benton.org/headlines/gop-house-members-seek-fcc-server-move-info | Broadcasting&Cable | House Commerce Committee
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
SENATE TO INVESTIGATE WHITE HOUSE ROLE IN GOOGLE'S ANTITRUST VICTORY
[SOURCE: National Journal, AUTHOR: Brendan Sasso]
A Senate panel plans to investigate whether the White House inappropriately derailed a federal investigation into accusations that Google was stifling online competition. Senate Judiciary's Antitrust Subcommittee Chairman Mike Lee (R-UT) plans to contact the Federal Trade Commission, Google, and other online companies to discuss the issue, said Emily Long, a spokeswoman for Chairman Lee. The subcommittee has no plans yet to hold a hearing on the issue, she said. The Senate probe comes after it was reported that FTC staff had prepared a report in 2012 recommending that the agency take Google to court for abusing its market power in online search and advertising. In early 2013, the five FTC commissioners rejected the staff recommendation and voted not to pursue charges against Google. The FTC meant to keep that staff recommendation secret but accidentally disclosed portions of the report in response to a request under the Freedom of Information Act. Documents that include sensitive business information or internal agency deliberations are usually exempt from public information requests. Although Chairman Lee is a staunch conservative who is usually skeptical of government regulation, he has also been a fierce critic of Google. "In short, we are interested in how the FTC allowed a confidential report to be disclosed, and second, what conversations, if any, the FTC or Google had with the White House about the pending investigation," Long said. "We are not likely at this time to re-examine the underlying merits of the investigation, which was closed. Our interest is in oversight."
benton.org/headlines/senate-investigate-white-house-role-googles-antitrust-victory | National Journal
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top