Tag: FCC

George Ou, the former Technical Director of ZDNet, has found a new job where he continues to lead the technology sector by publishing innovative thoughts and ideas – sometimes not necessarily his own.

For months now, Public Knowledge has been communicating to the FCC the need to place conditions on an approval of the proposed XM/Sirius merger. We would like to think this has been successful, as a draft order recently circulated by Chairman Martin proposed to approve the merger subject to conditions, many of which closely echoed our suggestions. Even more recently, XM/Sirius themselves identified a set of conditions they would voluntarily commit to should the merger be approved. Although we think the language of the merged entity’s proposed voluntary conditions need some work to truly reflect the public interest, this is a definite step in the right direction.

Of course, that assumes that XM/Sirius will ultimately abide by these obligations. After all, a condition is meaningless if it is ignored.

More than 40 years ago, the FCC was worried about telephone companies using their power over communications to control the then-nascent (and competitive) data processing marketplace. The Bell System at that point was already banned from providing services that weren’t common carriage communications services (or “incidental to” those communications services).

In Computer 1, the Commission tried to distinguish the use of computers for processing information from the use of computers as part of communications, with the goal of not allowing the Bell System into the data processing business.

For months, Comcast spokespeople have been deny, deny, denying that the FCC has the power to do anything about Comcast’s throttling of BitTorrent traffic. Now, in papers filed as part of a class action lawsuit against Comcast, Comcast has gone the opposite direction, asserting that because “these issues are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the FCC, and because the FCC is actively investigating them,” the judge should put the suit on hold until the FCC renders a decision. The court has agreed, staying the case until the FCC acts.

Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA

The Commission will hear from expert panelists regarding broadband and the digital future. The hearing is open to the public, and seating will be available on a first-come, first-served basis.

For additional information please see the meeting announcement (PDF): http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-283340A1.pdf

Recently, I was in South Korea, attending the OECD’s Ministerial on the Future of the Internet Economy. Rather than try to give a blow-by-blow account, I’ve tried to package some of my thoughts in a series of posts. Here’s one:

A few days ago, I picked on Chairman Martin’s speech at the plenary session of the OECD Seoul Ministerial. Among the various deregulatory policies Martin cited as enhancing competition (and thus the United States’ position in terms of broadband pricing and deployment) was the removal of unbundling requirements for broadband.

Martin used the removal of unbundling requirements as one of many examples in creating a (false, I think) dichotomy between competition and regulation.

Hot on the heels of the MPAA’s petition for waiver of the selectable output controls order by the FCC comes… movie theater owners? (PDF)

Right. They’re worried that streaming feature films direct to homes sooner than ever (but still one to two months after an exclusive theater release) could spell “the destruction of neighborhood movie theaters across the country” and “have a devastating effect on… consumers of motion pictures”. Them’s fightin’ words, Billy Joe!

For the past couple of days, I’ve been in South Korea, attending the OECD’s Ministerial on the Future of the Internet Economy. Rather than try to give a blow-by-blow account, I’ve tried to package some of my thoughts in a series of posts. Here’s one:

Late yesterday afternoon, Sirius and XM filed a letter with the FCC that lays out the “voluntary commitments” the companies will abide by in exchange for the FCC approving their merger. As I predicted yesterday, the commitment to provide 4% of channel capacity set-aside for noncommercial, educational and informational programming falls a good bit short of what PK and others have asked for. While we’re disinclined to fight over 1% of capacity (PK is asking for a 5% set-aside), there are other parts of this and other “commitments” that need change and clarification:

1. Channel capacity, not live, “full-time” channels, should be the metric for the non-commercial set-aside.

The Washington Post is reporting that FCC Chairman Kevin Martin is circulating a draft order that would permit the merger of XM and Sirius Satellite radio subject to six conditions. Under these conditions, the merged entity would

• place a price cap on programming (the AP is reporting that these would be three-year caps);

• offer a la carte programming choices;

• open the standards for satellite radio receivers so that any device manufacturer can make satellite radios;

• set aside 4% of their spectrum capacity (what now amounts to 12 channels) for non-commercial educational programming;

• lease another 4% to groups like minorities and women who are underrepresented in broadcasting; and