[TriLUG] OT: (slightly) FCC Chairman at UNC [summary notes]

[Andrew C. Oliver]

If they don't plan to take actions like that then there is no reason to 
make it legal :-)

Israel J. Pattison wrote:
> I wish someone could have challenged him on this part:
>
> On Net Neutrality: should the networks be able to charge content 
> providers
> for QoS on content types like video? ... Basically his answer was "We
> haven't seen network providers take action like that."
>
> We most certainly do have several good examples of network providers 
> taking
> such an action.  One comes from right here in North Carolina.  North
> Carolina-based Madison River Communications was ordered by the FCC to 
> stop
> blocking VoIP ports used by third-party VoIP providers.  Here is the FCC
> Order in that case:
>
> http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-543A1.pdf
>
> And here is the Consent Decree where Madison River promises not to block
> VoIP ports any more:
>
> http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-543A2.pdf
>
> ClearWire Wireless Broadband was blocking SIP ports used by Vonage as
> recently as a year ago.  Vonage had to play a silly cat-and-mouse game 
> with
> their SIP ports to maintain service continuity.  ClearWire provides a 
> VoIP
> solution similar to and in competition with Vonage.  Vonage attempted 
> some
> odd court maneuvers which may have lost them some ground.
>
> So, what exactly does the FCC Chairman mean by saying that we haven't 
> seen
> network providers take action like that?
>
> Israel
>
> On 3/6/07, Cristóbal Palmer <cristobalpalmer at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> The following is copied verbatim from my blog,
>> http://pebkac.homelinux.net. If you read http://planet.trilug.org, you
>> can safely ignore the rest of this message.
>>
>> On media consolidation: he admitted that policy changes in the recent
>> past have been a "challenge" and will present further challenges. He
>> said that there will be 6 public hearings and $100,000+ spent on
>> studies [That doesn't sound like much, does it? That's what? Salary
>> for two researchers and office space?]. I'll have to look into where
>> these hearings are being held. During the question and answer session
>> at the end, an audience member shared that he was an electrical
>> engineer and had been on the Chapel Hill Town Council when cable
>> franchises had been renewed in the late '90s. The audience member
>> asserted that the process had been anything but fair. He said it was
>> the least level playing field he had ever seen. This was after the
>> Telecommunications Act of 1996, and he was astounded (he said) by how
>> stacked the FCC rules were in favor of TWC. The town was left with no
>> option but to take what TWC offered. "I don't disagree with you," said
>> the Chairman. The rest of his comments basically boiled down to "how
>> do we make the playing field more beneficial to consumers while
>> avoiding driving profitable business out of that market?"
>>
>> On Net Neutrality: should the networks be able to charge content
>> providers for QoS on content types like video? Should we put rules in
>> place to prevent that? Basically his answer was "We haven't seen
>> network providers take action like that." Also, he framed it as if
>> tiered bandwidth choices [eg. 5Mbps down, 384Kbps up at one price;
>> 8Mbps down, 512Kbps up at another–what I'm getting from TWC right now]
>> were part of the Net Neutrality debate. A questioner at the end
>> brought this back up and specifically asked him to clarify that point,
>> and he seemed to have a better picture (read: logical picture) on the
>> second go-round. Regardless, it seemed to me he was being very careful
>> about his wording. It sounded like he was echoing Telco "concerns"
>> about Net Neutrality without actually making any statements.
>>
>> I got to ask the very last question. The question before mine was also
>> fairly interesting, so I'll repeat it here. The questioner asked if
>> there were plans to introduce regulation that would control content
>> provided via YouTube and other online video services. Mr. Martin said
>> that no, the Commission didn't have a mandate to regulate such content
>> since it was "pull-down" content. That is, consumers must actively
>> seek out that content, as opposed to content that is broadcast into
>> the home through TV. It was a quick answer, and one that made me
>> happy.
>>
>> I began my question by asking if he was familiar with Yochai Benkler's
>> Wealth of Networks. I'm not sure he understood that part of my
>> question, but he seemed to nod in recognition. I continued, saying to
>> the entire audience that I recommended the book to all, and that I
>> brought it up because of the "Last Mile" question, since the book
>> addresses that. My question for him, then, was what policies or
>> regulations the FCC was looking at that would address the problem that
>> only the incumbent Cable and Telco operations are investing in the
>> "Last Mile" of broadband deployment. I specifically asked if he had
>> any comments on various proposals for mesh networks. His response was
>> that the FCC has made changes to make BPL easier (sorry Tanner, I
>> didn't feel like I could interject–more on that later) so that local
>> power utilities could, at their option, compete in the broadband
>> internet space. He also said that the FCC was looking at devices that
>> would operate in the "TV White Space" and allow for mesh networks. He
>> explained that TV White Space is the unused portion of the TV spectrum
>> that was historically not assigned so as to prevent interference
>> between channels. Newer technology allows for the use of that white
>> space without risk of interference. He said that these devices would
>> have to be "smart" enough to listen first, identify the white space,
>> and then try "talking" to neighbors.
>>
>> I came away with very mixed feelings. Firstly, I was happy that he was
>> obviously very astute, bright guy. He knows what the issues of the day
>> are, and he knows how to talk about them. Trouble is, he seemed to
>> know how to talk about them at length without making real, meaningful
>> statements. His response to the former Chapel Hill Town Council member
>> is a perfect example. He agreed that limited choice is bad, but then
>> launched into an explanation of policy that didn't describe anything
>> that would meaningfully increase choice. On the other hand, he was
>> clearly eager to take questions and respond to people. In fact, the
>> Dean walked up to the front as he was finishing his response to the
>> question before mine. I raise my hand just as she started saying
>> something like, "That's all the time…" but he interrupted and asked if
>> he could answer my question, since I was the only one left with a
>> question. We were by my watch already two minutes over the time limit.
>> That's why I felt I couldn't interrupt when he suggested BPL as an
>> alternative broadband delivery method (sorry Tanner).
>>
>> I'm feeling bad that I didn't have more time to do my homework on him
>> and recent FCC policy changes before attending the talk. I think my
>> sparse notes reflect that. If they post video or audio of the talk,
>> I'll link to it in another post. I'm also sour that I didn't really
>> find out if he's even heard of Benkler. Who knows? Maybe he'll
>> actually read it.
>>
>> Peace,
>> CMP
>>
>> On 3/4/07, Cristóbal Palmer <cristobalpalmer at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Since at least one person found my Cory Doctorow posting helpful, I
>> > thought I'd pass on another:
>> >
>> > Who: FCC Chairman Kevin J. Martin
>> > When: noon Monday the 5th
>> > Where: 2603 in the Knapp-Sanders Building, home to the UNC School of
>> > Government (google map via tinyurl: http://tinyurl.com/2pgbyh )
>> >
>> > Please note that even if you can't make it, you can contribute by
>> > posting a question you'd like to have asked either here or on my blog
>> > ( http://pebkac.homelinux.net -- please note that new posters are
>> > moderated to prevent spam). If I can't ask your question, maybe
>> > somebody else can.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > --
>> > Cristóbal M. Palmer
>> > UNC-CH SILS Student -- ils.unc.edu/~cmpalmer
>> > TriLUG Vice Chair
>> > "There are many roads to enlightenment, and thus many roads back to
>> > the One True Debian" --crimsun
>> >
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Cristóbal M. Palmer
>> UNC-CH SILS Student -- ils.unc.edu/~cmpalmer
>> TriLUG Vice Chair
>> "There are many roads to enlightenment, and thus many roads back to
>> the One True Debian" --crimsun
>>
>> -- 
>> TriLUG mailing list        : 
>> http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
>> TriLUG Organizational FAQ  : http://trilug.org/faq/
>> TriLUG Member Services FAQ : http://members.trilug.org/services_faq/
>>


-- 
No PST Files Ever Again
Buni Meldware Communication Suite
Email, Calendaring, ease of configuration/administration
http://buni.org