July 2015

When government shares data about itself

[Commentary] A massive and disturbing US government data leak is making news. But at the same time, much progress is being made on the flip side of the issue of government-held data: releasing more, and more-easily-understood, information that citizens have a right to know about how government operates, including what decisions it’s making and how it’s spending their tax dollars.

Transparency in government operations is a key to open and clean government. While the new age of cloud storage can lead to hacks and leaks, it also offers an unprecedented opportunity for citizens to really see how their government runs. This transparency can help governments build a stronger relationship of trust with citizens, and even help the governments themselves root out corruption as they gain a clearer picture of their own operations. Government makes two data pacts with citizens: It must safeguard the personal information on citizens that it collects. But it also must make its own workings as public as possible. As American governments are struggling with the first task, they’re making encouraging progress on the second.

Comcast Offers Its Alternative to Cable TV, Using the Web

Comcast, the country’s largest cable operator, is responding to the rush of new streaming television alternatives with the start of its own web-based offering that includes a bundle of broadcast networks and the premium cable network HBO.

The new service, which costs $15 a month, represents a bid from a mainstream cable company to stay relevant to a new generation of viewers. Many consumers — especially younger ones — are willing to pay for Internet service but are ditching cable packages in favor of streaming services that are often cheaper and offer more flexibility than the typical cable bundle. For an extra $15 a month added to a Comcast Internet subscription, viewers will have access to live and on-demand programming on computers and mobile devices from about a dozen networks, along with cloud DVR storage and Streampix, Comcast’s movie offering. Called Stream, the new service will be available in Boston, Chicago and Seattle later this year and across the company’s coverage areas in the United States in 2016. There are limitations, however, that could curb the new service’s appeal to potential subscribers. To start, Comcast’s streaming service will not include any cable networks beyond HBO. Subscribers to the Comcast app will not be able to stream the service to their television sets, an option for most other rival streaming services. Also, people who live in areas where Comcast is not the cable provider will not be able to subscribe to the service.

Apple’s Share of Smartphone Industry’s Profits Soars to 92%

Roughly 1,000 companies make smartphones. Just one reaps nearly all the profits.

Apple recorded 92% of the total operating income from the world’s eight top smartphone makers in the first quarter, up from 65% a year earlier, estimates Canaccord Genuity managing director Mike Walkley. Samsung Electronics took 15%, Canaccord says. Apple and Samsung account for more than 100% of industry profits because other makers broke even or lost money, in Canaccord’s calculations. Apple’s share of profits is remarkable given that it sells less than 20% of smartphones, in terms of unit sales. The disparity reflects its ability to command much higher prices for its phones. Its rivals mostly use Google Inc.’s Android operating system, making it harder for them to distinguish their offerings, and prompting many to compete by cutting prices. Moreover, Samsung and HTC have made missteps in recent years.

Sundar Pichai of Google Talks About Phone Intrusion

A Q&A with Sundar Pichai, Google’s senior vice president of products.

Americans spend about three hours each day staring at their mobile phones. That’s a lot, but is it too much? Several new companies betting that consumers crave less phone time are offering products like apps that filter messages and jewelry that buzzes only when the most important messages arrive. Pichai speaks at length about how Google products and apps were meant to help provide balance, giving you information with letting you live your life. Pichai oversees most of the company’s core products and is considered the righthand man of Larry Page, Google’s chief executive.

The cyber defense crisis

[Commentary] The resignation of Office of Personnel Management Director Katherine Archuleta was overdue, but hardly sufficient. President Barack Obama needs to address more directly how this breach came about, who carried it out, what the government will do in response and, most important, how to take cybersecurity to a higher level. Put bluntly, adversaries are pummeling the United States. Neither the president nor Congress has treated cyberattacks as the national crisis they have become. President Obama has been way too passive about China. He should sound a klaxon to Beijing, and if that does not get the regime’s attention, retaliate. The technical outages at United Airlines and the New York Stock Exchange in recent days underscore how dependent we are on data networks. Leaving them vulnerable to thieves and espionage is an act of inexcusable negligence.

Privacy advocates ask regulators to take a closer look at gadgets that are ‘always on’

If your device is always ready to hear your commands, does that mean it's always listening, too?

The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) would like regulators to delve deeper into the privacy implications of devices, such as those with voice-controls that are "always on." The group posted a letter to the Federal Trade Commission and the Justice Department asking for an investigation always-on technologies present in devices from Microsoft, Google, Amazon and others. The group said that the average person probably isn't thinking about the privacy implications of these kinds of systems when they buy these devices. "It is unreasonable to expect consumers to monitor their every word in front of their home electronics," the letter says. "It is also genuinely creepy."

Spotify makes case against Apple in Congress

As Apple and Spotify battle to dominate the latest trend in music – online streaming — their corporate rivalry is morphing into a high-stakes influence war in Washington.

Spotify’s lobbyists have quietly made the rounds in DC, whispering to lawmakers for months that Apple’s new music offering threatens to stifle its competitors, according to sources familiar with the discussions. The apparent goal has been to raise antitrust suspicions about the iPhone giant, which faced a previous government lawsuit over its pricing of e-books. The secretive congressional meetings come amid reports that the Federal Trade Commission is looking into Apple’s streaming service, though the agency has declined to say if it’s opened a probe. Still, Spotify’s effort to fan the flames highlights the intensity of the clash between the two companies – and the potential for scrutiny as Apple enters a new, fast-evolving market.

A Human Rights Debate Reaches the FCC

[Commentary] Over the past two weeks, a debate at least three years old has reached the Federal Communications Commission: Does everyone have a fundamental right to access the Internet? That is -- Is Internet access a human right?

Strong arguments, it appears, can be made in a philosophical debate about Internet access as a human right. Although Vinton Cerf’s op-ed may be one the strongest arguments backing FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly’s recent stance, Cerf also highlights why Commissioner O’Rielly’s speech was so surprising. As he himself stressed in the same speech in June, Commissioner O'Rielly, as an FCC Commissioner, must follow the law. And, as Commissioner Clyburn noted in her response, Congress has directed the FCC to ensure that everyone, regardless of income, has access to advanced communications services. Congress also directed that such access should be affordable. Which means that Congress mandated closing the digital divide highlighted above. So why would a Commissioner O'Rielly basic principle for regulators be that Internet access isn’t a human right when Congress has already made it a civil right?

FCC Confirms Agenda for Open Meeting Thursday, July 16, 2015

The Federal Communications Commission will hold an Open Meeting on Thursday, July 16, 2015 and will consider the following items:

Incentive Auction Procedures: The FCC will take the next to commencing the incentive auction in the first quarter of 2016 by considering the Procedures Public Notice, which adopts a balanced set of auction procedures that will ensure an effective, efficient, and timely auction. The Public Notice establishes and provides information on final procedures for setting the initial spectrum clearing target, qualifying to bid, and bidding in the reverse and forward auctions.

Mobile Spectrum Holdings: The FCC will consider an Order on Reconsideration addressing petitions for reconsideration of certain aspects of the Mobile Spectrum Holdings Report and Order

Competitive Bidding: The FCC will consider a Report and Order, Order on Reconsideration, Third Order on Reconsideration and a Third Report and Order that provides meaningful opportunities for small business, rural telephone companies, and businesses owned by members f minority groups and women to participate in the provision of spectrum-based services, and also strengthens the FCC's rules to protect against unjust enrichment to ineligible entities.

Enforcement Bureau: The FCC will consider an enforcement item.

Setting Timelines for Revisiting Agency Decisions

Quite frankly, in the age of hyper-speed “Internet years,” the Federal Communications Commission’s approach to some issues is stuck in the age of rabbit ears, and this problem is expanding exponentially right along with our rules. While the Federal Communications Commission has statutory obligations to periodically review certain aspects of its rules, such as section 11 of the Communications Act, these requirements are generally given short shrift, when they are adhered to all. This is certainly an area where the agency needs to make significant improvement, but that doesn’t seem to be in the cards anytime soon. More broadly, the FCC needs to adopt procedures to proactively reexamine its rules and policies across its many proceedings. In particular, I have consistently pushed to add sunset provisions to agency orders. Let’s face it: nothing produces an honest assessment of a rule or program like its pending expiration. And the length of any particular provision may depend on a number of factors, including the state of the market, how detailed the rules are, and the resources needed to update the regulations.

In most cases, however, I expect that an evaluation of rules adopted in this fast changing sector should occur within five years. If it is not worth the cost to review the rules within five years, then I seriously question the benefit of retaining them or enacting them in the first place. The FCC deals with some of the most cutting edge issues and technologies. It also has a full docket. That is a recipe for precipitating, one small drop at a time, a swelling tidal wave of outdated rules and burdens. Perhaps if the agency made routine use of sunset provisions, these requests would not be viewed as votes of no confidence but rather as good government measures designed to ensure that our rules continue to serve their intended purposes, to the benefit of all.

Benton

Search