Benton RSS Feed
This paper analyses and compares national strategies for digital identity management in OECD countries. These strategies aim to drive innovation for e-government and for the broader Internet economy while remaining consistent with current national identity practices.
For most countries, the overarching objective or vision for the development of a national IdM strategy is the realization of electronic government. In addition to e-government, most countries also aim to foster innovation in the broader Internet economy, either explicitly or implicitly, either immediately or in the longer term. Two countries consider cybersecurity as the fundamental objective for their strategy rather than e-government and/or the development of the broader Internet economy. Although their vision has a different focus, the strategy of these two countries does not fundamentally differ from that of the other countries. Generally, however, innovation, e-government and cybersecurity can be identified in all countries‘ approaches. Variations are essentially related to the level where these dimensions are addressed (vision, strategy or policy). Fostering innovation in the broader Internet economy is a shared objective by a majority of responding countries but is not always explicitly mentioned as such. It can, however, be deduced from key aspects of their strategy and policies.
National IdM strategies aim to benefit businesses, citizens and the government. They are considered a key enabler for innovation in the public and private sectors: as they facilitate the generalization of stronger electronic authentication, they enable higher value services that require a high level of security assurance to be offered. They are also expected to have economic benefits in terms of reducing costs and increasing productivity in the public sector and to foster usability of online services. Increased trust or assurance about identities online – or even bi-directional trust between parties transacting or communicating online – is also highlighted as a key benefit for all participants.
National Strategies and Policies for Digital Identity Management in OECD Countries
The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit rejected as “premature” a lawsuit by Verizon and MetroPCS challenging the Federal Communications Commission’s pending rules aimed at keeping Internet service providers from blocking access to certain Web sites or applications.
While the decision is a first-round victory for the FCC and its chairman, Julius Genachowski, the real battle over the agency’s attempt to regulate broadband providers has barely begun. Several broadband companies, and some consumer advocacy and public interest groups, are likely to return to court this year to challenge aspects of the rules. Edward S. McFadden, a Verizon spokesman, said that the company intended to refile its lawsuit this year.
The Verizon lawsuit was dismissed as premature, the court said, because federal regulations dictate that a challenge to new FCC rules must come within 10 days after a new rule is published in the Federal Register. That publication has not taken place, although the FCC approved its rules in December, because the regulations must be reviewed for compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. That FCC review, which includes a 60-day public comment period, will be completed this month. Then, the Office of Management and Budget will conduct a review, with a 30-day comment period, before the rules are published. Once the regulations are published in the Federal Register, any legal challenge filed in 10 days is entered in a lottery to determine the legal venue. Verizon and MetroPCS tried to sidestep that provision by contending that the rules modified their licenses to operate wireless broadband networks. So, they said, the dispute was a licensing issue, not an appeal of a new rule, a position the court rejected.
Court Rejects Suit on Network Neutrality Rules Court Throws Out Verizon, MetroPCS Net Neutrality Lawsuits (PC Magazine) Appeals Court Tosses Out 'Net Neutrality' Lawsuits (WSJ)
The White House on April 4 threatened to veto legislation from House Republicans that would repeal network neutrality regulations.
In a statement of administration policy, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) said the president's advisers would recommend that he not sign a bill scrapping new Internet regulations from the Federal Communications Commission. "If the President is presented with a Resolution of Disapproval that would not safeguard the free and open Internet, his senior advisers would recommend that he veto the Resolution," the statement said. Network neutrality was an Obama campaign promise. OMB said scrapping the rules "would undermine a fundamental part of the Nation’s Internet and innovation strategy — an enforceable and effective policy for keeping the Internet free and open."
White House issues veto threat for repeal of network neutrality rules White House Vows to Protect Network Neutrality (Politico)
One of AT&T's chief justifications for its proposed takeover of rival T-Mobile USA is that the combination would quickly improve network quality and help solve a looming shortage of wireless spectrum in some cities. AT&T executives say the denser cellular network would improve voice calls and data communications in urban areas and speed the construction of its faster fourth-generation data network. But some industry executives and former FCC officials are skeptical the merger is the best way to address AT&T's network needs.
Instead, they say AT&T could add capacity to current cell towers or purchase under-utilized spectrum in a government-led auction, or from other companies. "Putting the two networks together does not create spectrum," said Gerald R. Faulhaber, a former chief economist of the Federal Communications Commission, who has worked as a consultant for AT&T and its rivals. Underlying the debate is the explosive growth of data usage on wireless networks as more Americans purchase smartphones and tablet computers, which allow consumers to more easily surf the Web, watch videos and download applications and games. James Taiclet, chief executive of American Tower Corp., a large independent owner and operator of cell sites, said AT&T and other wireless operators could double the amount of capacity they supply with current spectrum by investing more in new wireless equipment on existing cell towers.
David J. Farber, a former chief technology officer of the FCC and a professor at Carnegie Mellon University, said there are swaths of valuable yet underutilized spectrum being used by the TV industry and the federal government that the government could repurpose for wireless use. AT&T counters that saying the government is moving too slowly, and that if it freed up spectrum today it would take five years before wireless operators could have devices up and running on it. Broadcasters are resisting the proposal, arguing they already gave back a large swath of airwaves when the U.S. switched to digital-only TV broadcasts. They also worry the plan isn't as voluntary as the FCC has advertised.
Skepticism Greets AT&T Theory
A data breach at one of the world's largest providers of marketing-email services may have enabled unauthorized people to access the names and email addresses for customers of major financial-services, retailing and other companies.
While no financial information was compromised, the major concern is that the emails and names could be used for "phishing," that is, phony emails asking unsuspecting consumers to divulge information such as account numbers, log-ins or Social Security numbers. As a result, companies were warning customers that they don't ask for personal information, like credit-card and Social Security numbers, via email. On April 1, Dallas-based Epsilon, a subsidiary of Alliance Data Systems Corp., said that on March 30, "A subset of Epsilon clients' customer data [was] exposed by an unauthorized entry into Epsilon's email system. "The information that was obtained was limited to email addresses and/or customer names only," the company said, adding that no other information associated with those names was at risk." The company said an investigation is under way.
Breach at Epsilon Exposes Emails
A House subcommittee passed a bill April 1 to ensure that unused grant funds for two federal programs tasked with expanding access to broadband services across the country are returned to the US Treasury.
Rep Greg Walden (R-OR), chairman of the Communications and Technology subcommittee, said the legislation clarifies language that requires the programs to give back money awarded to projects that have been canceled. And it institutes a new requirement that would keep Congress in the loop regarding the awards. The bill refers to stimulus funds granted to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, which administers the Broadband Technology Opportunities Program launched two years ago to support the expansion of broadband access to all communities. The legislation also applies to stimulus-funded grants made by the Rural Utility Service’s Broadband Initiatives Program. NTIA chief Lawrence Strickling and RUS administrator Jonathan Adelstein testified at the hearing. Both said that they welcomed the spirit of the bill, but added that its provisions are consistent with the agencies’ standard processes and current U.S. law.
Communications and Technology subcommittee passes broadband scrutiny bill Obama administration will not fight scrutiny of broadband stimulus (The Hill)
Qwest and CenturyLink completed their $22 billion merger on April 1, creating the third-largest traditional phone provider in the nation behind AT&T and Verizon.
The announcement was expected after the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) greenlighted the transaction in March. The combined firm will be known as CenturyLink and remain based in Monroe (LA), though it will maintain a regional headquarters in Denver, formerly Qwest's home base. The two regional telecom providers are looking to offset declines in revenue from landline phones by promoting their broadband offerings. Both firms have shed jobs in recent years and more cuts from the combined workforce of 47,000 are expected. The FCC's approval came with conditions attached that aimed to increase the performance and adoption of the new entity's broadband coverage, particularly among low-income households. The new firm will offer service to 17 million phone lines and five million broadband customers in 37 states. CenturyLink must offer qualifying households broadband access for less than $10 per month and a computer for less than $150 for a period of five years. It must also increase actual download speeds to at least four megabytes per second for most users and pledge not to raise prices in Minneapolis and Olympia (WA), where the two firms previously competed.
Qwest, CenturyLink complete merger
I have serious concerns that as the Federal Communications Commission continues to address broadband deployment barriers outlined in the National Broadband Plan, new obstacles are being erected that are directly contrary to the Plan’s recommendations and goals.
I recently learned that several state legislatures are considering bills that are contrary to the deployment objectives of the Broadband Plan. For example, in North Carolina, the state legislature is currently evaluating legislation entitled ‘Level Playing Field/Local Government Competition.’ Last week the North Carolina House passed the bill, and it currently awaits consideration in the Senate. This piece of legislation certainly sounds goal-worthy, an innocuous proposition, but do not let the title fool you. This measure, if enacted, will not only fail to level the playing field; it will discourage municipal governments from addressing deployment in communities where the private sector has failed to meet broadband service needs. In other words, it will be a significant barrier to broadband deployment and may impede local efforts to promote economic development.
The National Broadband Plan recommended that Congress clarify that State, regional, and local governments should not be restricted from building their own broadband networks. When providers cannot meet the needs of local communities, the Plan provides that State, regional, and local entities should be able to respond accordingly, as they were able to do when municipal governments distributed electricity to thousands of rural communities during the 20th Century. Unfortunately, this National Broadband Plan recommendation continues to be ignored by some broadband industry members that are encouraging these misguided efforts.
Not long after the National Broadband Plan was issued, I had the privilege to visit North Carolina and speak about the goals in the Plan, and the importance of our nation using every available tool to address the broadband divide. I believe now, as I did then, that no American citizen or community should be left behind in the digital age. However, I remain concerned that when cities and local governments are prohibited from investing directly in their own broadband networks, citizens may be denied the opportunity to connect with their nation and improve their lives. Local economies will suffer as a result, and the communities’ ability to effectively address education, health, public safety, and other social issues will be severely hampered. Regrettably, North Carolina isn't the only state considering such legislation. My home state of South Carolina has similar legislation pending, and the state of Arkansas is contemplating a complete ban on publicly-owned broadband facilities. I fear that preventing local governments from investing in broadband is counter-productive and will impede the nation from accomplishing the Plan’s goal of providing broadband access to every American and community anchor institution.
FCC's Clyburn Opposes North Carolina Municipal Broadband Bans
The Federal Trade Commission Chairman issued the FTC’s 2011 Annual Report highlighting the agency’s continued efforts to protect financially distressed consumers and promote competition during the economic downturn.
The report describes the agency’s accomplishments during the previous year, including:
- Settling charges that Intel Corp. excluded chip rivals. To settle charges that it illegally used its dominant position for a decade to stifle competition and strengthen its computer chip monopoly, Intel agreed to no longer retaliate against computer manufacturers who do business with its rivals. The FTC’s consent order clears the way for competition unfettered by Intel’s exclusionary conduct.
- Revising the Horizontal Merger Guidelines. In the first major update in 18 years, the 2010 Horizontal Merger Guidelines more accurately reflect how the federal antitrust agencies identify and evaluate mergers that are likely to harm competition. The revised Guidelines, issued jointly by the FTC and the Department of Justice, provide more clarity and predictability for businesses.
- Releasing a staff report on privacy issues. Based on more than 40 years of enforcing privacy law, FTC staff proposed a framework to balance consumer privacy with industry innovation in the 21st century. Key recommendations include: 1) “privacy by design,” 2) simplified consumer choice, including 3) increased transparency of data practices.
- Bringing cases against national advertisers. The FTC challenged health claims made by several national food advertisers, including Dannon Company, Kellogg Company, Nestlé HealthCare Nutrition, Inc., and POM Wonderful, and strengthened order language. These actions make clear that no advertiser can make disease prevention and health benefit claims without real substantiation.
- Developing social media at the agency. The agency has information that tech-savvy consumers need to make informed choices, manage their finances, stay safe online, and avoid fraud. Consumers looking for up-to-date information on how to avoid the latest scams and schemes can now “like” the FTC on Facebook, “follow us” on Twitter, or check out educational videos on the FTC’s YouTube channel.
FTC's 2011 Annual report
[Commentary] Lots of attention has been lavished on Time Warner Cable's attempt to stream TV networks over its IP network, and the subsequent backlash from those TV networks. But that's just one recent development that will lead to the end of the multichannel TV bundle as we know it today. Two other developments -- Adobe's new TV Everywhere authentication scheme and Comcast's drive towards non-system network licensing -- spell the beginning of a scorched-earth phase that will unfold over the next year or so. And when it's done, the media landscape will look entirely different.
Here's what I think will happen. First, packages of multi-channel services will become unbundled from the physical transport -- so for example you'll be able to buy your TV shows from Comcast and your Internet service from Time Warner. But the individual TV networks will own the "Everywhere" authentication process, and begin to build a direct relationship with consumers. And once the bundles are unbundled -- and the networks have a direct line to the consumer -- the middleman (Comcast, Charter, Dish, DirecTV) will become disaggregated. And that means the end of the TV market as we know it.
Time Warner Cable, Comcast and the End of TV as We Know It