Wireless Telecommunications

As the Trump administration undertakes rural broadband access expansion, stakeholders disagree on ways to reach the target. At issue is a recent order adopted by the Federal Communications Commission during its August open meeting, which lowered the threshold for federal subsidies to expand mobile broadband from 10 to 5 megabits per second. There’s a discernible difference between those speeds: Basic web surfing is doable at 5 mbps. At 10 mbps, activities like video streaming become possible. According to a 2017 state of the internet report by technology firm Akamai, average mobile speed in the United States is just over 10 mbps. But rural areas have languished due to the low returns on investment for providers building the necessary infrastructure where there aren’t a lot of rate payers. The FCC plans to auction off the $4.53 billion in its mobility fund — MF-II — over the next ten years for companies to offer service in these high-cost areas.

In changing the target speeds for determining eligible areas, the FCC cited a petition by T-Mobile USA Inc., which argued that lowering the target speed to 5 mbps would help channel the subsidies to areas where there isn’t any of the necessary infrastructure, and are considered “unserved.” Rural wireless carriers say changing the speed target undermines work they’ve already done to deliver service. And they point to an earlier FCC assessment, under previous leadership, about the insufficiency of 5 mbps for delivery of services to rural Americans. Rural wireless carriers argue the change could threaten existing broadband service in “underserved” areas.

American Internet users are telling the Federal Communications Commission that mobile broadband is not a full replacement for fast home Internet service. The week of Aug 7, the FCC kicked off its annual analysis of broadband deployment and signaled that it might determine that smartphone access is a proper substitute for cable or fiber Internet. In doing so, the FCC could conclude that broadband is already being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion, and thus the commission could take fewer steps to promote deployment and competition.

There have been over 300 new comments filed since we wrote about this two days ago, almost universally lambasting the FCC's suggestion that Americans might not need fast home Internet service and could make do with mobile broadband only. Mobile is hindered by data caps, limits on tethering, and reliability problems that make it fall short of a wired Internet connection, people told the FCC.

[Commentary] A new Broadband Access Coalition of internet service providers has joined forces with consumer, schools and health care advocacy groups to petition the Federal Communications Commission to open up the airwaves for spectrum best suited to a new, superfast broadband service for the whole of America.

This new approach does not rely solely on fiber, which is costly and difficult to deploy, but instead harnesses wireless broadband. This technology can be deployed at up to one tenth the cost of laying new fiber cabling to homes, with far fewer disruptions and project delays. It can also bring new superfast Wi-Fi services to areas that have no or little choice over their broadband provider. 94 percent of our internet traffic traverses Wi-Fi and home or business broadband connections – not more expensive cellular airwaves. The coalition’s petition proposes to open up new wireless spectrum for improving broadband services cost-effectively. This spectrum can provide great coverage in underserved rural areas, and can stimulate new competitive Internet Service Providers to enter the market and connect dense suburban areas. Unfortunately, the mobile industry is lobbying to secure this new spectrum band for its own exclusive use. The new wireless approach means consumers no longer have to be tethered to any physical infrastructure. Unlike challenging other traditional utilities, action doesn’t require consumers to overhaul their homes – all they have to do is make their voices heard.

[Fink is the CPO and Co-Founder of Mimosa Networks]

As Internet-based distributors move up and down the stack to become vertically integrated platforms with a preferred suite of affiliated content, there is a growing concern among policymakers that innovation among independent content creators and websites may be threatened. More fundamentally, the Internet is not one thing—it is many things, and our current regulatory regimes are struggling to address that complexity. These new platforms give rise to potential conflicts of interest, in which it might pay for a vertically-integrated platform owner to sacrifice some profits (if any) in its distribution division in order to support an affiliated (or favored, third-party) application.

This essay focuses on identifying and fixing this potential regulatory gap when crafting a “net neutrality” policy—a set of rules or standards designed to spur innovation at the “edge” of the Internet by preventing Internet service providers (ISPs) from engaging in discriminatory conduct. But the essay could just as easily be directed at the powerful online platforms wielded by Amazon, Facebook, or Google. The applicability of this remedy to other parts of the Internet is natural, not because market power is paramount there (though it certainly exists), but because there is a large enough threat to innovation in adjacent markets to online shopping, social media, and search, respectively.

[Singer is Principal, Economists Inc., and Senior Fellow, George Washington Institute of Public Policy. The author has served as a consultant to both ISPs and independent cable networks in regulatory matters.]

Americans might not need a fast home Internet connection, the Federal Communications Commission suggests in a new document. Instead, mobile Internet via a smartphone might be all people need. The suggestion comes in the FCC's annual inquiry into broadband availability. Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act requires the FCC to determine whether broadband (or more formally, "advanced telecommunications capability") is being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion.

During the Obama administration, the FCC determined repeatedly that broadband isn't reaching Americans fast enough, pointing in particular to lagging deployment in rural areas. These analyses did not consider mobile broadband to be a full replacement for a home (or "fixed") Internet connection via cable, fiber, or some other technology. But with Republican Ajit Pai now in charge, the FCC seems poised to change that policy by declaring that mobile broadband with speeds of 10Mbps downstream and 1Mbps upstream is all one needs. In doing so, the FCC could conclude that broadband is already being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion, and thus the organization would take fewer steps to promote deployment and competition.

Lawyers representing a man convicted of six robberies in the Detroit area have now filed their opening brief at the Supreme Court in one of the most important digital privacy cases in recent years. This case, Carpenter v. United States, asks a simple question: is it OK for police to seize and search 127 days of cell-site location information (CSLI) without a warrant? Previously, lower courts have said that such practices are compatible with current law. But the fact that the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case suggests that at least four justices feel that perhaps the law should be changed.

In Carpenter, as is the case in countless modern criminal cases, law enforcement was able to obtain the relevant records directly from the mobile phone provider with a court order that has less stringent requirements than a warrant. This is not a trivial distinction. A so-called "d-order" can be circumspect with how information is obtained by authorities. It does not, as the Fourth Amendment demands, require as much particularity. A warrant, unlike a d-order application, also mandates a signed and sworn affidavit ("on oath or affirmation"), as the Constitution requires, which describes the "places to be searched and the things to be seized." Carpenter's attorneys, many of whom are from the American Civil Liberties Union, argue in their filing that the current legal standard gives the government too much leeway. "If the Court were to accept this argument, the government could use this tool to monitor the minute-by-minute whereabouts of anyone—from ordinary citizens to prominent businesspersons to leaders of social movements," they wrote in their August 7 brief.

The Senate approval by unanimous consent of the (S. 19), a bill they introduced to boost the development of next-generation gigabit wireless broadband services, including 5G, by ensuring more spectrum is made available for commercial use and by reducing the red tape associated with building broadband networks. Elements of :

Making 500 megahertz available: A 2010 executive order set a goal of making available 500 MHz of federal spectrum for private sector use by 2020. The makes that goal the law.
Speeding up 5G infrastructure: Next-generation gigabit wireless services, like 5G, will rely on smaller and more numerous antenna and infrastructure systems than current cellular technology. Federal agencies would have a new obligation to make decisions on applications and permit requests for placing wireless infrastructure on federal property in a timely and reasonable manner.
Spectrum assessments: The bill directs the Federal government to conduct assessments of spectrum in the 3 GHz band and in the millimeter wave frequencies to determine whether authorizing licensed or unlicensed wireless broadband services in those bands is feasible, and if so, which frequencies are best suited for such operations. Frequencies totaling more than 13 gigahertz of bandwidth will be studied, most of which are in the millimeter wave frequencies that will be critical for next-generation wireless networks, including 5G mobile networks.
Dig once: The Act facilitates adoption of safe and efficient “dig once” policies by states. Dig once is the idea that a single conduit through which all broadband wires can be run should be laid in the ground at the same time as other below-ground infrastructure work, like highway construction. Dig once can reduce costs for deployment of broadband infrastructure.
National broadband facilities asset database: The bill creates a central, online inventory of federal government property assets available or appropriate for private-sector deployment of broadband facilities. Such information includes the location of buildings and points of contact for siting applications. State and local governments would be permitted to voluntarily submit information about their assets to the inventory.
Reallocation incentives: The Commerce Department would be directed to issue a report within 18 months on additional legislative or regulatory proposals to incentivize Federal entities to relinquish or share their spectrum with non-federal spectrum users.
Immediate transfer of funds for agencies: The accelerates the relocation of Federal entities by allowing existing Spectrum Relocation Fund balances to be transferred to agencies for transition efforts immediately upon completion of an auction, rather than after the actual receipt by the Fund of auction proceeds. By immediately executing their transition plans, agencies would reduce their timelines to vacate, potentially increasing auction proceeds due to the value of accelerated access to the auctioned bands.

The internet’s global expansion is entering a new phase, and it looks decidedly unlike the last one. Instead of typing searches and e-mails, a wave of newcomers—“the next billion,” the tech industry calls them—is avoiding text, using voice activation and communicating with images. They are a swath of the world’s less-educated, online for the first time thanks to low-end smartphones, cheap data plans and intuitive apps that let them navigate despite poor literacy. Incumbent tech companies are finding they must rethink their products for these newcomers and face local competitors that have been quicker to figure them out.

Mr. Singh, 36, balances suitcases on his head in New Delhi, earning less than $8 a day as a porter in one of India’s biggest railway stations. He isn’t comfortable reading or using a keyboard. That doesn’t stop him from checking train schedules, messaging family and downloading movies. “We don’t know anything about e-mails or even how to send one,” said Mr. Singh, who went online only in the past year. “But we are enjoying the internet to the fullest.”

Sprint’s resumed talks about a potential merger with T-Mobile, being held at the same time as discussions with cable companies, shows the lengths billionaire Masayoshi Son is taking to build scale for a wireless carrier facing increasing competition in the US. The two mobile operators restarted discussions after Sprint’s exclusive negotiating period with Comcast and Charter Communications expired at the end of July, apparently. Son, who leads Sprint’s largest shareholder SoftBank Group Corp., is pursuing all options for industry consolidation as he continues to weigh a potential offer for Charter. SoftBank has been considering making a formal takeover bid for the cable company and combining it with Sprint.

Dish Network believes that its plan to launch a narrowband Internet of Things (IoT) network will enable it to meet the Federal Communications Commission’s build-out requirements for its spectrum, according to Jefferies Equity Research Americas. But it may need some help. Dish continues to sit on a significant pile of midband spectrum, but the clock is ticking for the company to put its airwaves to use one way or another. FCC rules stipulate that the satellite-TV provider must reach a 70% build-out by March 2020, and Dish faces similar mandates for its licenses in the AWS-4 band.

“We do not believe that it serves the public interest or makes business sense to build out a 4G/LTE network now that would duplicate networks already offered by the wireless incumbents, and subsequently require an almost immediate upgrade in order to be competitive,” the company wrote in a March filing with the FCC. “Instead, Dish plans to deploy a 5G-capable network, focused on supporting IoT—the first to be deployed in these bands anywhere in the world. … This network will not be burdened with a requirement to be backward-compatible with legacy services.”