Internet/Broadband

The Lifeline Connects Coalition spoke with staff at the Federal Communications Commission’s Wireline Competition Bureau on May 26, 2017 to discuss the Universal Service Administrative Company’s (USAC) current plan to require Lifeline subscribers to re-prove their eligibility when they are migrated to the Lifeline National Verifier and the significant burden and confusion that will impose on Lifeline participants. The Coalition said obtaining re-proof of eligibility from Lifeline subscribers is likely to be highly unsuccessful and the overwhelming majority of those de-enrollments would be due to consumers’ failure or inability to respond, not their lack of continuing eligibility for Lifeline.

The Federal Communications Commission’s Wireline Competition Bureau released a Public Notice on May 31, 2017 granting, denying and dismissing various petitions related to actions taken by the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) on the E-rate program and rural healthcare. Petitions for reconsideration or applications for review of these decisions must be filed within 30 days of the Public Notice.

As with many past industry-supported attacks on municipal broadband, it will take some time for interested readers to dig into the details of the University of Pennsylvania Law School professor Christopher Yoo’s study and fully understand its strengths and weaknesses. That will occur in due course. There are, however, a number of serious problems with this study that leap out at once.

For one thing, almost immediately after releasing their report, the authors issued a press release acknowledging that they had “erroneously stated that the bonds used to finance the projects in Chattanooga, TN; Lafayette, LA; and Wilson, NC; call for balloon payments toward the end of their bond terms.” While the authors claim that this error did not affect their financial analysis, one wonders how many other serious errors exist in the study—and how many other times the authors took shortcuts instead of reviewing the full available data. Perhaps if they had contacted the cities at issue to verify the data, they could have caught this mistake in advance. Apparently, they skipped that step as well. A particularly important shortcoming of the study is that the choice of 2010 through 2014 as the study period introduced significant selection bias. Another problem with the Yoo study is that the boldness of its conclusions is undermined by the many caveats and qualifications set forth at various points in the study.

Too often, reports on the feasibility of municipal broadband networks in smaller markets are sponsored by large telecom companies with a financial stake in the game. Many communities with muni networks wonder if these researchers are measuring success the wrong way.

[Commentary] Reverting back to a voluntary approach to network neutrality potentially threatens the well-being of many people, particularly those at risk for health disparities due to low income or rural residency. Not only does this voluntary approach shift winners and losers to favor large telecommunication giants, we are specifically concerned with several areas of health care being negatively impacted, including innovative solutions for telemedicine, health enhancement, and cost effective scalable sharing of health care data.

In summary, the new FCC may be proceeding in directions that may make it harder to use telehealth, cloud-based EHRs, and remote sensing technologies that improve access to care and potentially lower costs for all. A thoughtless move toward free enterprise on the Internet could have a negative impact on the health of the most medically underserved Americans. We urge the FCC to investigate the unintended consequences of policy changes to insure that they do not amplify issues of health disparities in lower income and rural populations.

To make sure the network neutrality rollback survives court challenges, newly appointed Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai must justify his decision to redefine broadband less than three years after the previous change. He argues that broadband isn't telecommunications because it isn't just a simple pipe to the Internet. Broadband is an information service because Internet service providers give customers the ability to visit social media websites, post blogs, read newspaper websites, and use search engines to find information, the FCC's new proposal states. Even if the ISPs don't host any of those websites themselves, broadband is still an information service under Pai's definition because Internet access allows consumers to reach those websites.

[Commentary] Amid the raucous political debate, there is a critical issue many are overlooking: the threat to network neutrality. Net neutrality is a critical component of the future of the Internet, but the real issue is the lack of fast, affordable Internet in America — directly caused by a lack of adequate competition. If consumers had more providers to choose from, the market would solve the issues of privacy protections, network neutrality and much more. People would not stand for poor privacy practices and content restrictions, usurious prices and poor quality. They would seek other options, forcing providers to change their practices.

So how can you get involved to keep the FCC from dismantling net neutrality? Spread the word — talk to your friends, family and neighbors. Educate them on the subject and encourage them to take a stand and engage the appropriate government representatives at the federal, state and local level. We must band together for the long journey ahead to effect change.

[Dane Jasper is the CEO and founder of Sonic, an Internet and telecommunications company in Santa Rosa (CA)]

As the Federal Communications Commission prepares to deregulate the telecommunication and cable industry by rolling back the agency's network neutrality rules, some people on both sides of the issue already say the battle is pretty much moot. On May 31, Netflix chief executive Reed Hastings signaled he thinks the current fight is unwinnable. "I think Trump's FCC is going to unwind the rules, no matter what anybody says," Netflix chief executive Reed Hastings said. "That's going to happen, and then we get to see what's going to come out of that."

[Commentary] When Congress killed Federal Communications Commission rules that would stop internet providers from selling your browsing history to advertisers, supporters of that move told upset internet users to cheer up. Now, they all said, we could finally protect your privacy everywhere online! Instead of having rules that constrained only internet providers while letting sites and apps have fun with your data, we’d get our shot to develop a comprehensive privacy framework for all these companies. Two months later, something interesting has happened: A new bill by House Communications Subcommittee Chairman Marsha Blackburn (R-TN).

Blackburn’s BROWSER Act of 2017—as in, “Balancing the Rights of Web Surfers Equally and Responsibly”—would apply an opt-in standard to both providers and sites. And many of the people who had so much to say about online privacy in March have nothing to say about this bill… which suggests it will fare as well as other attempts to write new privacy laws. You’d think this bill would warrant a comment by the trade groups that had supported developing a uniform privacy standard—or the internet providers that had pledged in January to operate by an opt-in standard. You would be wrong. Spokespeople for the 21st Century Privacy Coalition, NCTA, CTA, the Chamber, and Comcast all said they had yet to take a stance on the bill, which has drawn four Republican co-sponsors to date. CTIA did not respond to queries but has yet to post anything about Blackburn’s proposal either.

What’s the next Wi-Fi frontier? And how can we tap into it for public good? A key band of airwaves that companies are seeking is the unused spectrum in lower frequencies that sit between TV channels. The spectrum in the gaps between bands of airwaves reserved for broadcast television offers prime real estate for companies seeking to bolster connectivity. Those unused bands of airwaves, known as “TV white spaces” (TVWS), are a target for Microsoft in particular. The company recently introduced a program to bring free Internet access to rural families to help bridge the “homework gap” in Charlotte and Halifax counties in southern Virginia.

In 2016, New America’s Open Technology Institute also urged the Federal Communications Commission to allow schools to leverage TVWS to give students lacking broadband at home remote access to the school’s high-capacity broadband, which would be subsidized by the federal E-Rate program.