Internet/Broadband

Oracle plans to send a letter voicing its support of House telecom subcommittee Chairman Marsha Blackburn's (R-TN) new privacy bill. The recently introduced legislation would require both Internet service providers and so-called edge providers including Google and Facebook to develop opt-in policies for users to share their sensitive information, including browsing histories. Oracle senior vice president Ken Glueck said the bill creates parity among industries and also starts discussion on what should be considered sensitive information. "I think in my mind, location information is far more sensitive than web browsing," Glueck said. "But that's a debate that has to be had."

AT&T also offered support: "We have always said consumers expect their online data to be protected by a comprehensive and uniform privacy framework that applies across the entire internet ecosystem and includes operating systems, browsers, devices, ISPs, apps, online services and advertising networks," spokesman Michael Balmoris said, adding that, "We support Chairwoman Blackburn for moving the discussion in that direction, and we look forward to working with her as this legislation moves forward." USTelecom and CTIA had no comment at this time. Mobile Future did not respond to a request for comment. Meanwhile, the Internet Association is set to huddle with Chairman Blackburn. The group has already shared its opposition to the legislation and said that the bill has the potential to "upend the consumer experience online and stifle innovation."

Not to be deterred, Chairman Blackburn called out consumers as well in her response to these critiques. "I thought the Internet Association would be more supportive of protecting consumers," she said. "I think if you ask the American people if they're OK with having less control over their online privacy so companies can sell their data - they'd say no."

The Electronic Frontier Foundation also said it wouldn't support the bill in its current form, pointing to its preemption of state user privacy laws and the uniform treatment of ISPs and online companies as problematic. "The complications that the bill create by treating everything the same really stems from the fact that these are really different industry sectors and the markets are extraordinarily different," EFF legislative counsel Ernesto Falcon said. "It's an open field on the internet. People have choices, and new companies are coming in all the time. That's not the case at all when you're talking about broadband access."

Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) is considering some sort of Senate version of the legislation and we can now add Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) to that list as well. "Sen. Daines worked in the private sector for over 12 years and understands the importance of protecting personally identifiable information," an aide from his office said in an email. "Steve is looking into this proposal and discussing it with Montana stakeholders."

The rules of broadband are changing, and local governments want a say in how they evolve.

In an ex parte filing l with the Federal Communications Commission, several municipal officials, along with a representative of the National League of Cities, outlined a recent meeting with FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn and a member of her legal staff. The city officials voiced their concern that the newly-formed Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee (BDAC) is lacking in representation from local municipal governments, and that industry executives and advisors make up an overwhelming proportion of the committee's membership. According to the letter, the officials "encouraged the Commission to work in the direction of partnership with, rather than preemption of, local officials, who share the Commission's goal of closing the digital divide."

The National League of Cities notes that more local representatives have been appointed to BDAC working groups of late, but the organization argues that working group participation isn't enough and that the Commission should "increase the number and diversity of local officials on the BDAC to a level comparable with the number and diversity of industry officials."

It is an era of unprecedented interest in broadband as a platform of economic and community development. Advanced communications networks are increasingly recognized as a growing engine for economic activity, democratic participation, healthcare, and education. Local governments, in particular, increasingly embrace opportunities to develop next-generation broadband in their communities—and to reap the many benefits that broadband will deliver to their residents and businesses. Emerging public–private partnership (P3) models present a promising alternative to the traditional “municipal broadband” or “middle mile” models for the many communities that lack the capital or expertise to deploy and operate fiber networks, or to act as Internet service providers (ISPs) on their own. These models include: 1) Public facilitation of private investment, 2) Public funding and private execution, and 2) Shared investment and risk.

[Commentary] The first half of the Federal Communications Commission’s Restoring Internet Freedom notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) sets out the FCC majority’s proposal for reversing classification of broadband internet access services as “telecommunications services” governed by Title II of the Communications Act. Among other things, this section discusses the effect this reversal would have on the FCC’s ability to enforce its privacy laws and implement its Lifeline program, which provides a subsidy to low-income households for broadband. The second half purports to “re-evaluate” the existing net neutrality rules, the mechanisms that enforce them and any legal authority (other than Title II) that could be used to support them.

The FCC majority proposes to eliminate the “general conduct standard,” which prohibits ISP practices that “unreasonably interfere or unreasonably disadvantage” the ability of consumers to access the online content and services of their choosing, and the ability of online content and service providers to freely access customers. With regard to the remaining rules (no blocking, no throttling, no paid prioritization, transparency), the majority doesn’t make firm proposals on whether to retain or repeal them. Instead, it asks questions about whether the rules are even necessary.

The authors conducted an analysis of every municipal fiber project in the United States based on the authoritative documentation issued by the cities, specifically the official legal disclosures filed with securities regulators when issuing municipal bonds and their audited financial statements.

We identified 88 municipal fiber projects. Of these only 20 of them report the financial results of their broadband operations separately from the financial results of their electric power operations. We then apply the conventional tools of financial analysis to determine the likelihood that municipal fiber projects will remain solvent. Specifically, we focus on Net Present Value (NPV), which provides a more accurate picture of the cash flowing into and out of an organization than do analyses based on a project’s operating profits and losses.

We also take a closer look at seven projects that either have been successful or have received substantial publicity: Bristol, Tennessee; Vernon, California; Chattanooga, Tennessee; UTOPIA, Utah; Burlington, Vermont; Lafayette, Louisiana; and Wilson, North Carolina.

An examination of the NPV covering the five-year period from 2010 to 2014 reveals that of the 20 municipal projects that report the financial results of their broadband operations separately, 11 generated negative cash flow. Unless these projects substantially improve their performance, they will not be able to cover the costs of current operations, let alone generate sufficient cash to retire the debt incurred to build the project. For the nine projects that are cash-flow positive, seven would need more than sixty years to break even. Only two generated sufficient cash to be on track to pay off the debt incurred within the estimated useful life of a broadband network, which is typically projected to be 30 to 40 years. One of the two success stories is an industrial city with few residents that is unlikely to serve as a model for other cities to emulate.

Approximately 140,000+ rural homes across four states -- West Virginia, North and South Carolina, and Tennessee -- have improved broadband access, due in part to Frontier and the Federal Communications Commission’s Connect America Fund (CAF) investments. Impacted states include. With 134,000 homes, West Virginia saw the bulk of these broadband improvements. The CAF directly funded new broadband expansion to 16,900 homes there, with an additional 117,000 households seeing improved broadband capability.

Rep. Blake Farenthold (R-TX) offered a head-slapping defense of a conspiracy theory he touted on CNN: It was something that he’d seen on the Internet.

Rep Farenthold was suggesting that questions about any link between Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russian actors was “deflecting away from some other things that we need to be investigating in.” “There’s still some question,” he said, “as to whether the intrusion at the server was an insider job or whether or not it was the Russians.” CNN’s John Berman interrupted. “I’m sorry,” he said. “The insider job — what are you referring to here? I hope it’s not this information that Fox News just refused to be reporting.” “Again, there’s stuff circulating on the Internet,” Rep Farenthold said. Co-host Poppy Harlow asked if it was responsible to cite Internet rumors as a rationale to launch a congressional investigation. Rep Farenthold replied that the media sometimes relied on anonymous sources for its reporting — so therefore it was.

The Federal Communications Commission’s Restoring Internet Freedom notice of proposed rulemaking states: “Whether posting on social media or drafting a blog, a broadband Internet user is able to generate and make available information online. Whether reading a newspaper’s website or browsing the results from a search engine, a broadband Internet user is able to acquire and retrieve information online… In short, broadband Internet access service appears to offer its users the “capability” to perform each and every one of the functions listed in the definition — and accordingly appears to be an information service by the definition. We seek comment on analysis.”

Let’s just run down the obvious objections:

• First, most broadband providers simply don’t offer the services listed.
• Second, broadband providers often aren’t even aware what information they are transmitting, because it is encrypted.
• Third, most services that are in fact offered by the ISP, such as DNS lookup, error pages, caching and routing, all have to do with reasonable network management — the work of getting packets from one place to another properly.

Not all small broadband Internet access service providers are on board with the idea of repealing current net neutrality protections.

Dane Jasper, the CEO of Sonic, a large, independent ISP in California, said “incumbents will have a real advantage over new market entrants in the internet marketplace" if current rules are changed, which would create “a duopoly where consumers have only one or two choices when selecting an Internet provider as a result.” Jasper said the reclassification of ISPs as common carriers under Title II “has not impacted Sonic’s investment in infrastructure or our ability to serve customers.” “Only bigger carriers have enough subscribers to force content providers to pay additional fees,” Jasper said, “which is why these bigger carriers support the roll back of net neutrality regulations, while smaller ISPs support rules in favor of an open Internet.”

Service providers aren’t the only type of business to take into account when considering the effects of net neutrality. Edge providers — including websites, internet services, content providers — are all equally affected by how the internet is regulated. More than 1,000 such companies have signed on to an open letter to the FCC encouraging the commission to keep intact the Title II classification. The letter includes signatures from startups, investors and entrepreneurial support organizations in all 50 states.

[Commentary] What developers need is an internet where anyone that’s smart, hardworking, and a little lucky can win. Not a playing field that is rule-free, but one where the rules are known, and where rules are stable and consistent. The flaw in an Federal Communications Commission-driven internet is that the rules reflect the ideology of the sitting commissioners. When the referees change, the rules change too. That frustrates investors, stifles entrepreneurs and kills innovation. But the fix is simple: Congress must establish a permanent set of net neutrality rules and remove the FCC from the game. A set of rules, established by Congress, can easily put the issue of net neutrality to rest and support future investment and innovation in a strong, stable, and open internet. Any other course would be, well, Groundhog Day.

[Bruce Gustafson is a senior advisor for the Application Developers Alliance.]