Era of anonymous prepaid cell phones may end
Fri May 28, 3:41 pm ET
  
Prepaid cell phones with plans that can be purchased with cash and sans identification have long been the communication medium of choice for criminals and such, and for obvious reasons. Without a known cell phone number to tie a crook to, getting a wiretap becomes almost impossible, and such villains can generally operate with complete impunity, gabbing away in plain sight with no one able to listen in.And we’re not just talking about crack dealers. The convenience and anonymity of prepaid plans has reportedly even made them popular with Wall Street types engaging in insider trading activity. Naturally, terrorism is a major concern, too. The FBI says it found that the recent Times Square bomb scare was arranged through the use of a prepaid cell phone, as well.Frustrated with this loophole, now lawmakers are looking to make prepaid cell phones considerably less anonymous, AFP reports. A bipartisan bill announced this week in the Senate would require prepaid cell phone buyers to provide ID before a purchase.This is unlikely to sit well with many legitimate users of prepaid phones, who often don’t have the money for a regular, subscription-based, post-paid plan. Anonymity is prized by many prepaid users, whether they are using the phone to evade an abusive partner, to blow the whistle on dangerous working conditions, or simply to avoid telemarketers and political pollsters.But Ars Technica notes that for many governments, the criminal risks of anonymous phone usage outweigh such concerns: Collecting registration date from prepaid customers is already required by at least nine of the 24 countries that belong to the Organization for Cooperation and Economic Development. And several states have laws requiring papers when you buy a cell phone of any kind.Will this legislation go federal? With few people stepping up to complain about the proposal, it certainly seems likely.
  

Era of anonymous prepaid cell phones may end - Yahoo! News

Blogged with the Flock Browser

EDC prepares to map broadband in R.I.
by Chris Barrett_PBN Staff Writer
from the Jan 11, 2010 edition

Robert Anderson equates Rhode Island’s broadband network to a high-speed highway system without any road signs or maps.

As companies and state officials seek to expand the state’s online freeway they operate without basic information, such as the availability and speeds of Internet connections. That makes it awfully hard to pitch a business plan or secure a grant, said Anderson, CEO of Barrington-based WindTalk, a company that works to bring broadband to rural areas across the country.

In response to the dearth of available information, WindTalk created its own map of Rhode Island broadband connections. But Anderson said not everyone can do that. Hence, a stimulus-funded project by the R.I. Economic Development Corporation to collect and verify the availability, speed and location of broadband across Rhode Island should help fill that void, Anderson said. The Rhode Island Broadband Mapping Program will also provide another tool to economic officials as they attempt to woo companies with big technology needs to the state.

“It’s import to understand what the landscape looks like,” Anderson said. “It’s very important from a standpoint of understanding how to leverage infrastructure and grow an economy.”

The $1.5 million in federal money comes in two parts: $1 million to develop a map, with the remaining $500,000 to support five years of broadband-planning activities.

The money was awarded by the U.S. Commerce Department’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration, which plans to create a national broadband map by February 2011.

EDC spokeswoman Meaghan Wims said that as of Jan. 6 the agency had yet to select a contractor to undertake the mapping. EDC staff in charge of the project did not immediately return calls seeking comment last week.

Anderson, whose company submitted a bid for the mapping project, thinks the final map will show what is already well-known in industry circles: that Rhode Island has excellent broadband coverage thanks primarily to Cox Communications Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc.

A spokeswoman for Cox said the company already is available to 98 percent of the state’s homes. And a spokeswoman for Verizon said it can service 99 percent of the state with either DSL or FiOS, the company’s high-speed Internet service. What remains, both spokeswomen said, was improving access for people that may sit near a high-speed line but do not tap into it for economic, technological or other reasons.

“For us, it’s not about needing to build more to make it available in Rhode Island,” Cox spokeswoman Amy Quinn said. “What we’re seeing is it’s more of an adoption issue.”

Jeff Thompson, president of Middletown-based Towerstream Corp., said adoption is also fueled by price, which can be lowered when competition enters a market.

“It’s great to say we have 100 percent coverage in a market but that doesn’t mean everyone is going to get service because it might be very expensive,” he said.

Thompson’s company delivers high-speed Internet via a wireless network to customers in Providence and nine other markets, often at prices below the dominant broadband providers. To justify the economic viability of their service – and the company’s requests for stimulus grants – Thompson said Towersteam needed to go hunting for data.

“The mapping part was very difficult and very expensive to get that data from third parties because you can’t just call up the incumbents and ask them for information,” Thompson said, adding that big broadband providers are often reluctant to tip their hand about connections for fear of competition. He supports the EDC mapping project.

The public information to come out of the mapping project excites George Loftus, executive director of OSHEAN, a group of universities, hospitals and other nonprofits that partner on technology needs. The group is looking to tap into $7.2 billion in federal stimulus money for broadband projects. It has already submitted applications totaling $25 million that would string fiber-optic cable in some of the state’s more rural areas, bring mobile computing labs and more computers to the state’s public libraries, and help establish computer centers at housing complexes run by the Providence Housing Authority.

Publicly available information about the state’s broadband connections would make justifying similar applications for funding in the future far easier, Loftus said.

“It can only help us,” Loftus said. “One of the things we learned when the economic stimulus money became available was having a plan in place, and knowing where you want to move forward really helps you move quickly.”

Loftus and Anderson said Cox and Verizon have already established robust networks, but some areas remain without service. And they and other for-profit companies are unlikely to enter the most rural parts of the state where the cost of installing the infrastructure would not pay off. Both said the planning money could help lead to innovative solutions to bringing high-speed Internet access to those people, who reside mostly in the northwestern part of the state or on Block Island.

“We just can’t leave those people waiting,” Loftus said. “We’ve got to come up with a solution.”

One solution could be the one proposed by OSHEAN. Loftus said the organization envisions running fiber-optic cable along the northern portion of Route 102. A partner could tap into that cable and install wireless networks that could reach homes far from the road.

Bringing the nation’s rural populations onto America’s high-speed network is critically important, said Art Brodsky, director of communications for Public Knowledge, a public interest group that studies technology issues.

Brodsky said high-speed Internet is becoming a necessity. Job applications are going online, newspapers are publishing online and even instructions for industrial machines are hosted on Web sites.

“The whole underlying point is, broadband is service for the economy much as telephone and electricity was for the 19th and 20th centuries,” Brodsky said.

With the Internet playing a large role in society, Brodsky said it is important for states to take the mapping and planning seriously.

“The whole point of this endeavor is to get an honest view of where broadband is and isn’t,” he said.

EDC prepares to map broadband in R.I. - Providence Business News

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Why Don't Losers In The Google Fiber Lottery Build Their Own?
Because they'll get sued by incumbents, or run up against incumbent-crafted laws
01:28PM Friday Apr 09 2010 by Karl Bode

Of course there's more than a few towns and cities who've been tripping over themselves to impress Google, in the hopes that the search giant will pick their location for deployment of Google's new 1 Gbps fiber to the home trial. Given Google's limited ambitions on this front (they only plan to service 50-500k subscribers, and do not want to be a national ISP), there's going to be more than a few disappointed towns and cities. Of course we've seen more than a few people suggest that cities who don't get selected should just run off and build their own networks (assuming they have the money and something a good business plan):

Municipalities have options other than winning the Google lottery, according to David St. John, a spokesman for the Fiber to the Home Council for America. He counts himself a fan of the project for the attention it has brought to fast broadband..."If you want fiber, you don’t need to jump in a shark tank," St. John said, referring to a Sarasota, Florida, mayor’s stunt to get Google’s attention. "You can get with a company that can overbulid your area or talk about floating some bonds and get yourself some fiber. There are things you can do to bring fiber to your community, and you don’t need Google to do it."

Of course the Fiber To The Home Council is primarily dominated by fiber gear vendors, who get paid no matter who builds the network. The problem is, incumbent ISPs have spent the better part of the last decade lobbying for regulations that make it very difficult for smaller ISPs to seriously compete. And if you're a town or city? We've been writing for ten years about how ISPs have smeared, lied, sued or lobbied to have laws passed that prohibit your town or city from wiring itself -- even if you all vote for it.

We've seen incumbent ISPs hire push pollsters to tell locals they'll have their TV viewing rationed by the government if they approve a local fiber deployment. We've seen projects sued for using utility poles the local incumbent doesn't even own. We've seen jobs in local support centers threatened if a town or city begins considering their own broadband network. Even if the city makes it through the approval gauntlet laid before them, many then face devastating delays and financial losses fighting off incumbent ISP lawyers in court. This is all assuming they have a sound business model to begin with.

That's not to say it isn't possible -- but the FTTH Council's David St. John goes so far as to insist that if communities want broadband, all they really need to do is click their heels like Dorothy in the Wizard Of Oz and they'll be whisked off to broadband nirvana. The reality is that while "hey, just go build your own network" certainly sounds nice, it ignores what has been a very ugly decade of the nation's wealthiest ISPs doing absolutely whatever is necessary to ensure they don't see competition - of any kind.

So why can Google get away with it? For one Google's deployment is about testing next-gen video ad delivery, but it's also a PR stunt designed to draw attention to the fact that many communities simply are not served well by their local incumbent. Whatever town or city Google chooses, it's unlikely to be a market well served by incumbents. Even if it is, these carriers aren't going to want to engage in their usual anti-competitive tricks with the entire country watching.

Related:
What Network Neutrality Is REALLY About
So, Is This Where Verizon's FiOS Deployment Ends?
Exploring Amsterdam's Fiber To The Home Build
The Press Realizes The FiOS Party Is Over

Why Don't Losers In The Google Fiber Lottery Build Their Own? - dslreports.com

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Verizon's CEO Is Going To Find And Throttle You
CEO again hints at his dream for higher LTE broadband pricing
05:59PM Wednesday Apr 07 2010 by Karl Bode

"those are the people (heavy users, users of video) we will throttle and we will find them and we will charge them something else."
-Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg

Speaking this week at the Council For Foreign Relations, Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg said a lot of things, including the fact that the company has told Apple they're ready to offer the iPad. Industry reporter Dave Burstein directs our attention to the full transcript of Ivan's interview this week, and it's worth a read. It's chock full of the usual telco speak, including the industry meme that U.S. broadband is simply the best, and if you think otherwise, you're not looking at the data correctly. But also buried in the conversation are some very interesting comments about Verizon hunting video users and throttling them:

But when we now go after the very, very high users, the ones who camp on the network all day long every day doing things that - who knows what they're doing - those are the -
MURRAY: It's video, right? I mean, it's video.
SEIDENBERG: But those are the people we will throttle and we will find them and we will charge them something else. Now, the dilemma we have is that government will come in and say well, I'm not sure we want you to do that.
MURRAY: Net neutrality. We want -
SEIDENBERG: Net neutrality could be used against that.

Burstein wonders if this might be Seidenberg's "free ride on my pipes" moment that triggers another round of network neutrality fisticuffs. He's of course referring to former AT&T CEO Ed Whitacre's (who now runs GM) comments in 2005 that AT&T wasn't going to let Google get a "free ride" on their network. Those marginally-coherent comments really kicked off the modern network neutrality debate as we know it, given AT&T seemed to be suddenly saying they wanted to charge content companies (who already pay for bandwidth) prioritization fees to serve AT&T users (who also already pay a LOT for bandwidth) more quickly. Says Burstein of Seidenberg's gaffe:

Could this be Ivan's "they are not going to use our pipes" moment that ignited the battles in D.C? Every lobbyist in D.C., including Ivan's own, is shouting net neutrality is unnecessary because none of the carriers will do anything like throttling most video. Comcast has demonstrated that even on cable very, very few users take enough bandwidth to be any issue. "Far less than 1%," Comcast's Jason Livingood recently told D.C. With almost no traffic intervention, Comcast's bandwidth costs are so low (about $1/month/customer) they tell Wall Street they have 80% margins on cable modem service. Everyone technical knows the "congestion problems" are wildly overstated.

Of course we've repeatedly stated that while ISPs do face congestion issues, congestion is usually overstated for political, anti-competitive, or high price justification reasons. To be fair to Ivan, it does sound like he's speaking generally, and could be referring to more intelligent, marginally-noticeable bandwidth management techniques. In context, it also sounds like Seidenberg was thinking about wireless networks, not terrestrial. Given the more limited capacity of wireless networks that changes things -- but only to a point. Burstein still isn't buying the need to throttle Internet video users:

The new LTE networks will have ten times the capacity within three years and cost 70+% less per gigabyte carried. Wireless has limits, but they are so far above current usage on a decent network these just aren't big issues. Certainly not enough to suggest throttling all customers who regularly watch video.

Seidenberg goes on to insist he's simply interested in heavily monetizing the "10 percent that's abusing the system," but that they're not interested in impacting demand with these pricing models. Again, while industry executives keep talking about how they need new pricing models because of some nebulous sense of altruism - the pricing models they implement (in addition to pricey ETFs and endless fees) aren't based on fairness or pure per-byte billing. They're designed with one goal in mind: having everybody pay more to offset expected losses in voice and SMS revenues.

Fairness has nothing to do with it. Terms like "abusers" and "bandwidth hogs" are used to justify pricing policies that very often impact all users. Yes, there are a small number of users (usually less than 1%) who consume an inordinate amount of bandwidth. However, you need to ask yourself why dealing with these users requires a completely new pricing model that winds up kicking you in the teeth.

Given how Verizon keeps hammering this talking point about fairness and the need for a new billing paradigm, you really have to wonder exactly what kind of pricing model Verizon is cooking up for their LTE wireless broadband service. Verizon already employs low caps and overages for wireless, and it sounds like users can expect more where that came from. Of course Verizon Wireless will only charge what consumers let them get away with - and consumers let Verizon Wireless get a way with an awful lot.

Related:
So Much For The Talk of Open Wireless Networks
Verizon's New Wireless Pricing Is An Insult
Verizon: Metered Broadband Is Coming

Verizon's CEO Is Going To Find And Throttle You - dslreports.com

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Verizon: No FiOS for 10 R.I. cities, towns
by Ted Nesi and Alissa Foley_PBN Staff Writers
Published online April 7, 2010

PROVIDENCE – Verizon Communications Inc. is nearly finished with building its $23 billion high-speed broadband TV and phone network, FiOS, which means the service will not be available anytime soon in 10 Rhode Island cities and towns.

Verizon has received approval from the R.I. Public Utilities Commission to install FiOS in 29 of Rhode Island’s 39 cities and towns. The company has finished installing FiOS in all of those places except three: Hopkinton, Richmond and Westerly.

At this time, Verizon does not plan to seek any more franchise approvals nationwide, including in the 10 Rhode Island municipalities without FiOS: Barrington, Block Island (New Shoreham), Bristol, Jamestown, Little Compton, Middletown, Newport, Portsmouth, Tiverton and Warren, Verizon spokesman Phil Santoro said in an e-mail.

Most of Rhode Island’s largest localities did get FiOS, though, which is not the case in every state. A number of major cities served by Verizon – including downtown Boston and Baltimore – have not had the service installed.

By the end of the project, Verizon says approximately 70 percent of its households will have FiOS Internet access available, with a slightly smaller percentage having access to television service.

Some investors questioned Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg’s decision to spend $23 billion on a new broadband infrastructure, but he “may have the last laugh,” The Wall Street Journal noted last week. With Internet traffic growing rapidly and requiring increased capacity, “the FiOS investment is likely to be vindicated,” the paper said.

Unlike other cable companies, though, Rhode Island’s other dominant telecom – Cox Communications Inc. – has not cut corners on broadband expansion.

Cox is spending billions to boost its network’s spectrum capacity to 1 Gigahertz (GHz). FiOS provides 850 Megahertz (MHz), and the average cable company only offers 750 MHz.

Verizon: No FiOS for 10 R.I. cities, towns - PBN.com - Providence Business News

Blogged with the Flock Browser

R.I. ahead of curve in Internet use
01:00 AM EDT on Wednesday, March 17, 2010
by Cynthia Needham_Providence Journal Staff Writer

As federal regulators roll out a far-reaching plan to expand Internet access nationwide, while boosting speed and reducing prices for those who already have it, officials say the proposal could have a significant impact on Rhode Island, improving health care, education and business services.

The Federal Communications Commission’s plan, submitted to Congress on Tuesday, would extend broadband to rural parts of the country, and upgrade delivery service to spur economic growth and eliminate the lag between the United States and other countries.

Calling the issue “the great infrastructure challenge of the early 21st century,” the FCC said it aims to increase home broadband use from about 65 percent of households to 90 percent in the next 10 years.

Rhode Island is ahead of the curve when it comes to home use. About three out of four people in the state live in a household with Internet access, according to a 2009 survey done by the U.S. Census Bureau. That ranks Rhode Island 11th in the country.

The impact of provider upgrades here would be subtle, but far-reaching.

“What is more speed going to do? Looking back 10 years, I couldn’t have told you that the iPod would exist and that you’d be watching television reruns on your telephone, but now we can’t imagine not having that,” said George Loftus, president and CEO of the Ocean State Higher Education Economic Development and Administrative Network (OSHEAN).

Faster broadband would allow college students to participate in distance learning. It would help hospitals send electronic images of x-rays and it would improve the ability of businesses to participate in teleconferencing.

“Building out our infrastructure to support a more robust ability to move data is important in so many of these ways,” said Stuart Freiman, broadband program manager at the Economic Development Corporation.

Though some of these improvements are now available at a price, systemwide upgrades would make faster service accessible to more Rhode Islanders at a lower cost, particularly on high-use networks such as those at the state’s colleges and public computing centers.

“Libraries, especially, are getting slammed in this recession because people are canceling their home subscriptions,” said Loftus.

Separate from the FCC plan, OSHEAN is applying for a $30-million grant to improve speed at institutions including hospitals and colleges. The federal plan, they say, would enhance that mission.

And while most of Rhode Island is already wired, there are small, mostly rural pockets that don’t have broadband, an absence that can create property value problems and leave residents at a disadvantage.

To finance the proposal, the FCC has talked of redirecting at least some of the Universal Service Fund, which uses telephone surcharges to install phone lines in low-income and rural areas. It has also raised the possibility of auctioning off wireless spectrum.

“Will this drastically change Rhode Island? Probably not, because we’re in pretty good shape to begin with,” said Loftus. “… but because we already have basic infrastructure in place, we might be a state where this plan rolls out. It will happen here before it happens in rural states.”

Most Recent Comments:
yabasta 9 hours ago wrote: The question they're not discussing with the FCC proposal is, what about net neutrality? That is, will the proposal, when Congress is done with it, trade the increased access and speed for censorship based on the providers' commercial interests?

FCC loses key ruling on Internet `neutrality'
by Joelle Tessler, AP Technology Writer – Tue Apr 6, 5:39 pm ET

WASHINGTON – A federal court threw the future of Internet regulations into doubt Tuesday with a far-reaching decision that went against the Federal Communications Commission and could even hamper the government's plans to expand broadband access in the United States.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that the FCC lacks authority to require broadband providers to give equal treatment to all Internet traffic flowing over their networks. That was a big victory for Comcast Corp., the nation's largest cable company, which had challenged the FCC's authority to impose such "network neutrality" obligations on broadband providers.

Supporters of network neutrality, including the FCC chairman, have argued that the policy is necessary to prevent broadband providers from favoring or discriminating against certain Web sites and online services, such as Internet phone programs or software that runs in a Web browser. Advocates contend there is precedent: Nondiscrimination rules have traditionally applied to so-called "common carrier" networks that serve the public, from roads and highways to electrical grids and telephone lines.

But broadband providers such as Comcast, AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. argue that after spending billions of dollars on their networks, they should be able to sell premium services and manage their systems to prevent certain applications from hogging capacity.

Tuesday's unanimous ruling by the three-judge panel was a setback for the FCC because it questioned the agency's authority to regulate broadband. That could cause problems beyond the FCC's effort to adopt official net neutrality regulations. It also has serious implications for the ambitious national broadband-expansion plan released by the FCC last month. The FCC needs the authority to regulate broadband so that it can push ahead with some of the plan's key recommendations. Among other things, the FCC proposes to expand broadband by tapping the federal fund that subsidizes telephone service in poor and rural communities.

In a statement, the FCC said it remains "firmly committed to promoting an open Internet and to policies that will bring the enormous benefits of broadband to all Americans" and "will rest these policies ... on a solid legal foundation."

Comcast welcomed the decision, saying "our primary goal was always to clear our name and reputation."

The case centers on Comcast's actions in 2007 when it interfered with an online file-sharing service called BitTorrent, which lets people swap movies and other big files over the Internet. The next year the FCC banned Comcast from blocking subscribers from using BitTorrent. The commission, at the time headed by Republican Kevin Martin, based its order on a set of net neutrality principles it had adopted in 2005.

But Comcast argued that the FCC order was illegal because the agency was seeking to enforce mere policy principles, which don't have the force of regulations or law. That's one reason that Martin's successor, Democratic FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, is trying to formalize those rules.

The cable company had also argued the FCC lacks authority to mandate net neutrality because it had deregulated broadband under the Bush administration, a decision upheld by the Supreme Court in 2005.

The FCC now defines broadband as a lightly regulated information service. That means it is not subject to the "common carrier" obligations that make traditional telecommunications services share their networks with competitors and treat all traffic equally. But the FCC maintains that existing law gives it authority to set rules for information services.

Tuesday's court decision rejected that reasoning, concluding that Congress has not given the FCC "untrammeled freedom" to regulate without explicit legal authority.

With so much at stake, the FCC now has several options. It could ask Congress to give it explicit authority to regulate broadband. Or it could appeal Tuesday's decision.

But both of those steps could take too long because the agency "has too many important things they have to do right away," said Ben Scott, policy director for the public interest group Free Press. Free Press was among the groups that alerted the FCC after The Associated Press ran tests and reported that Comcast was interfering with attempts by some subscribers to share files online.

Scott believes that the likeliest step by the FCC is that it will simply reclassify broadband as a more heavily regulated telecommunications service. That, ironically, could be the worst-case outcome from the perspective of the phone and cable companies.

"Comcast swung an ax at the FCC to protest the BitTorrent order," Scott said. "And they sliced right through the FCC's arm and plunged the ax into their own back."

The battle over the FCC's legal jurisdiction comes amid a larger policy dispute over the merits of net neutrality. Backed by Internet companies such as Google Inc. and the online calling service Skype, the FCC says rules are needed to prevent phone and cable companies from prioritizing some traffic or degrading or services that compete with their core businesses. Indeed, BitTorrent can be used to transfer large files such as online video, which could threaten Comcast's cable TV business.

But broadband providers point to the fact that applications such as BitTorrent use an outsized amount of network capacity.

For its part, the FCC offered no details on its next step, but stressed that it remains committed to the principle of net neutrality.

"Today's court decision invalidated the prior commission's approach to preserving an open Internet," the agency's statement said. "But the court in no way disagreed with the importance of preserving a free and open Internet; nor did it close the door to other methods for achieving this important end."

FCC loses key ruling on Internet `neutrality' - Yahoo! News

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Gloves off, telecom giants to FCC: It's on!
By Cecilia Kang | April 5, 2010; 7:00 AM ET

It didn’t take long for the gloves to come off.

Soon after the Federal Communications Commission released its national broadband plan a few weeks ago, the nation’s biggest telecom companies began a battle against specific measures and questioned the agency’s ability to regulate broadband services.

Verizon Wireless and AT&T sent petitions last week to the agency, protesting a condition to a satellite broadband merger that would exclude them from partnering up with the new company.

“The process used to include these conditions in the SkyTerra order was deeply flawed and inconsistent with the transparent, open and fact-driven decision-making that has been an early hallmark of your chairmanship,” wrote Steven Zipperstein, general counsel at Verizon Wireless in a letter to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski.

The condition isn’t part of the national broadband plan, but some communications policy experts say the requirement was a signal of similar policies to come. The move could signal, for example, spectrum caps or other rules attached to spectrum auctions and the formation of a public safety network that would exclude the biggest players in favor of smaller competitors.

Zipperstein's statement follows comments by lobbyists for Verizon and AT&T, calling for a sweeping review over Internet policy. They want Congress to take over regulation of broadband service providers and to lessen the FCC’s rule-making authority in favor of a case-by-case enforcement approach to Internet governance. Google CEO Eric Schmidt joined Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg in a joint op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal telling the FCC to approach regulation with a light touch.

Rebecca Arbogast, an analyst at Stifel Nicolaus, said those comments were meant to counter any move by the agency to classify broadband as a common carrier service, under which the FCC has clear authority. Comcast, the nation’s biggest cable and broadband services company, hasn’t weighed in on reclassification or specific elements of the national broadband plan. The company, whose lawsuit against the FCC began the debate over the agency’s jurisdiction, is seeking FCC approval for its merger with NBC Universal.

“The biggest caveats and concerns for the Bells would be if the FCC, in response to court review, moves to reclassify broadband as a more heavily regulated Title II telecom services, and/or crafts strict net neutrality rules,” Arbogast wrote in a research note. “The significance of these fundamental issues were reflected in Verizon’s strategic decision to call on Congress to revise the central foundation of the Communications Act.”

The comments also signal a change in tone, observers said. Aside from protests of a net neutrality policy proposal last fall, analysts and telecom attorneys said the top telecom and cable companies had been reluctant to criticize Genachowski.

Now that the plan is out and the hard work of creating new rules begins, the agency will face significant resistance from a deep-pocketed telecom and cable industry against policies on competition like special access, data roaming and small business line sharing.

Ben Scott, policy director for public interest group Free Press, said look no further than the long and difficult battles between former FCC Chairman Kevin Martin and the cable industry over a la carte pricing for a glimpse of what the new agency’s leadership will face. Martin faced similar battles with telecom companies over net neutrality and other reforms. Hill staffers have said intense lobbying by the cable industry contributed to an investigation by a House committee of Martin.

“The only reason this looks new and shocking is that for so long the FCC hasn’t made a decision opposed by a major company,” Scott said. “The FCC has spars with companies on a regular basis and this is good news.”

Post Tech - Gloves off, telecom giants to FCC: It's on!

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Mozilla leader worries about Internet limits
by Edith M. Lederer, Associated Press Writer Mon Jan 25, 10:02 am ET

MUNICH, Germany – The leader of the Mozilla Project, whose Firefox Web browser now has 350 million users, said Sunday that she is concerned that legal restrictions could limit Internet expansion.

Mitchell Baker said she worried about "the increase in laws that make it difficult to run an open network," especially rules about content.

"You suddenly become liable for anything that gets downloaded, whether it's legal or not," she said. "If you said to a municipality, if you build a road, you have to guarantee nothing illegal happens on it — that's what's happening on the Internet now. So that's the kind of regulatory disruption that's going to have some long-term consequences."

Baker spoke at an opening panel of a three-day conference on digital innovation and creative ideas.

The DLD conference — which stands for Digital-Life-Design — is chaired by Hubert Burda of Germany, owner of Hubert Burda Media, and digital investor Yossi Vardi, who co-pioneered instant messaging and chaired the panel, titled "Disruptive."

Niklas Zennstrom, co-founder of Skype which now has over 500 million users, said successful companies can't become complacent and must continue to make improvements and not be afraid "of disrupting themselves."

Vardi asked J.P. Rangaswami, chief scientist of the BT Group in Britain, what he thought of what Skype was doing to telecommunications companies like his.

"Watch this space," Rangaswami replied cryptically.

Vardi then asked Rangaswami whether he sees the industry following Skype's efforts to set minimal charges for phone calls around the world.

"I think those parts of the industry that don't follow what Niklas is doing will either find themselves out of a job or working for him," he replied.

American entrepreneur Jimmy Wales, whose nonprofit charity founded Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that has 350 million users, said it was a "very, very bad business" to try to compete against because the reference work is offered for free.

He ruled out advertising on the site for now — but left open the possibility it could happen sometime in the future to raise money for the charity.

Moderator Vardi expressed amazement that the Internet companies had small work forces despite their vast number of users.

Skype has just over 600 employees, Mozilla about 250, and Wikipedia just 30.

What advice would the three give to companies trying to get 100 million users?

"Stay out of software first of all," said Mozilla's Baker. "Go to Web sites and services."Wales said, "Have a very pure, simple vision that everyone can understand immediately."

Zennstrom said the idea should also "make consumers' lives easier." And, he stressed, "don't do a copycat of someone else."

BT's Rangaswami said he believes the Web in the past 20 years has made people more willing to collaborate, to work together. The emphasis is on online data "because it's through that that people can do things," he told The Associated Press.

Ranjaswami said the key is transparency.

"So I think all the data.gov initiatives are very, very important because that's laying the foundations of the next generation — how we use that transparency of public information to start really making change as a result of community," he said.

Yves Daccord, director-general of the International Committee of the Red Cross, said in a video presentation that Twitter and the social media have been very important in mobilizing a response to the earthquake in Haiti and giving the people "the sense that we are very close."

In the future, he said, he expects victims of disasters to use social media more effectively to communicate their needs so humanitarian organizations can deliver better services and reunite families.

Print Story: Mozilla leader worries about Internet limits - Yahoo! News

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Astronauts finally get Internet access in space
by MARCIA DUNN, AP Aerospace Writer_Fri Jan 22, 1:26 pm ET

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. – In a high tech first — really, really high — astronauts in space finally have Internet access.

Space station resident Timothy (TJ) Creamer had been working with flight controllers to establish Internet access from his orbital post ever since he moved in last month. On Friday, his effort paid off. He posted the first live Twitter post truly from space.

"Hello Twitterverse!" he wrote. "We r now LIVE tweeting from the International Space Station -- the 1st live tweet from Space! :) More soon, send your ?s"

Before, orbiting astronauts had to send such Twitter updates by e-mail to Mission Control in Houston. Then controllers posted the tweets.

The International Space Station crew can now use an on-board laptop to reach a desktop computer at Mission Control, and thereby browse the Web. This remote Internet access is possible whenever there is a solid high-speed communication link.

It's expected to provide a big morale boost.

"Long-duration astronauts, they commit to spending months away from family and friends. It's a pretty unique state of isolation," said NASA spokesman Kelly Humphries. "We expect this to enhance morale and productivity."

The astronauts will be subject to the same Internet access guidelines as other on-the-job government employees, namely no interfering with work.

Is NASA worried the astronauts might spend too much time online, more than 200 miles up?

"These are highly driven individuals," Humphries said with a chuckle, "so they're going to get their work done first."

The astronauts already had an Internet Protocol phone for private calls to family and friends.

Creamer is one month into a five-month mission. He is sharing the space station with another American, one Japanese and two Russians.

On the Net:
NASA: http://www.nasa.gov/home/index.html
Creamer's Twitter feed: http://bit.ly/90Wy8e

Print Story: Astronauts finally get Internet access in space - Yahoo! News

Blogged with the Flock Browser

McDonald's to start free Wi-Fi at most U.S. stores
Mon Jan 11, 9:20 pm ET

NEW YORK (Reuters) – McDonald's Corp plans to offer free Wi-Fi service at most of its U.S. restaurants, starting on January 15, a spokeswoman said on Monday.

The largest U.S. fast-food chain had previously said it would provide free Wi-Fi at some point in early 2010 but had not given a date.

A McDonald's spokeswoman told Reuters that free Wi-Fi will be available at about 11,500 out of its 14,000 locations.

The company currently offers Wi-Fi for a rate of $2.95 for two hours, she said.

(Reporting by Martinne Geller; Editing by Steve Orlofsky)

Print Story: McDonald's to start free Wi-Fi at most U.S. stores - Yahoo! News

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Analyst: AT&T Not Spending Enough On Wireless
08:28AM Wednesday Jan 20 2010 by Karl Bode

Network problems are the company's own fault...

During one of many discussions about AT&T's wireless network shortcomings a few weeks ago, a handset executive anonymously told the press he felt that AT&T would need to spend an additional $10 billion on backhaul to get their network up to snuff. That of course doesn't address coverage -- and AT&T's 3G network coverage continues to lag industry-leading Verizon. TownHall Investment Research tells IDG News that AT&T also needs to spend about $5 billion to extend broadband coverage. AT&T's taken heat lately for soaring wireless revenues, that aren't being matched by network investment, something Townhall's Gerard Hallaren agrees with:

According to TownHall, AT&T's capital expenditures on its wireless network from 2006 through September 2009 totaled about $21.6 billion, compared with $25.4 billion for Verizon and $16 billion for Sprint (including Sprint's investments in WiMax operator Clearwire). Over that time, Verizon has spent far more per subscriber: $353, compared with $308 for AT&T, Hallaren said. Even Sprint has outspent AT&T per subscriber, laying out $310 for network capital expenditure. That investment shortfall has been the major cause of AT&T's poor network performanc.

Apparently it isn't just satirists and fake CEOs who are noticing that AT&T's making a killing, but not putting adequate funds back into the network. Again that's great for investors (AT&T's entire reason for holding full investment back), but not so great for those who'd actually like to complete a phone call while walking down Fifth Avenue.

Analyst: AT&T Not Spending Enough On Wireless - Network problems are the company's own fault... - dslreports.com

Verizon Tips LTE Specs: Think Data, Not Phones
 
by Sascha Segan - PC Magazine - Fri Apr 17, 2009 10:01AM EDT
 
Verizon Wireless today put out their first round of specs for their upcoming 4G LTE network, and they want to remind folks: "Initially, Verizon Wireless will be providing packet data service over the Verizon Wireless LTE 3GPP Band 13 network."
 
That means the first LTE devices will be more about tapping into LTE's 8-12 Mbps data speeds than about making phone calls.
 
The specs describe basic requirements to connect to Verizon's upcoming network, and they're pretty much unreadable unless you have a degree in electrical engineering. But a quick perusal of the specs reveals two more interesting tidbits: IPv6 will be required, and support for Verizon's 3G CDMA network will not.
 
In fact, the current version of the specs offers no guidance for people trying to manage CDMA-to-LTE handoffs, implying that the first round of devices may be LTE-only. Verizon says that the specs are incomplete and will be frequently revised, though, so CDMA-to-LTE handoff information may appear.
 
Does this mean no LTE phones? Of course not. You've got to take into account where these specs are coming from, Verizon's Open Development Initiative. The ODI has so far been a way for Verizon to certify unconventional data devices on their network - things like ankle bracelets and security systems. Phones generally go through Verizon's traditional development channels, which are not so public.
  
Verizon CTO Dick Lynch said in February that the first 20-30 LTE cities will be turned on in 2010, that there will be phones and PDAs available, and that each device will have to be certified by Verizon to work on the network - you won't just be able to use generic LTE gadgets. AT&T, T-Mobile and MetroPCS also plan to roll out LTE networks, but Verizon is currently first in line.
 
Verizon will hold a webcast on May 13 for folks who want to know more about the LTE specs.
  

Verizon Tips LTE Specs: Think Data, Not Phones by PC Magazine: Yahoo! Tech

Blogged with the Flock Browser

T-Mobile USA drops unlimited voice plan to $50*
*For select customers
 
March 2 2009 - 1:58 pm ET | Allie Winter
 
T-Mobile USA Inc. is offering a $50-per-month unlimited voice plan to its veteran customers nationwide. In combination with the recent price cut on its unlimited data and unlimited text monthly add-on price to $35 per month, according to a customer service representative, T-Mobile USA has an industry-low $85 per month unlimited voice, text and data offering.
 
Peter Dobrow, spokesman for T-Mobile USA, said there are offers out there, but would not provide specific details or confirm the reduced unlimited data and text price.
 
“We are offering select customers pricing plans that reward their loyalty to T-Mobile,” Dobrow said. “We are not providing further comment.”
 
News initially broke that the carrier was running the $50 promotion in San Francisco, but as of today, any customer in any location who has been with T-Mobile USA for 22 months or longer can sign up for the promotion. Editorial staff at RCRWireless.com successfully signed up two users in different locations for the $50 plan.
 
As a part of the deal, customers can add additional lines under the same unlimited offering for an even cheaper rate of $40 per month per line, which in combination with the $35 unlimited data/text package, provides a $75 per month unlimited offering. The carrier is also offering a $135 credit to customers that bring a new customer from a different carrier onto their family plan.
 
This is a is significantly lower than customers who signed up for T-Mobile USA’s normal unlimited voice and text offer, which runs $100 per month.
 
The new pricing nearly matches Sprint Nextel Corp.’s Boost Mobile’s recent launch of its unlimited everything plan for $50 per month and seems to indicate increased competition around the $50 per month price point. Regional unlimited carriers MetroPCS Communications Inc. and Leap Wireless International Inc. both operate aggressively near that price point.
 
Bill Ho, an analyst at Current Analysis, said that because this promotion is a retention deal, it brings to light some of T-Mobile USA’s recent downfalls, including its modest fourth-quarter results.
 
“Last quarter they showed that their churn was bad so retention is key,” Ho said. “But one of the bad things about retention deals is publicity. From a carrier perspective, you don’t want to offer retention deals because it means that people are leaving and it might cannibalize the people who are really, really good at working the system.”
 
Ho added that T-Mobile USA confirmed the nationwide availability of the new offering to the research firm.
 
Further, Ho said this move is a strategic way for T-Mobile USA to fight back against competitors without initiating a rate-plan battle.
 
“No carrier wants to be dragged into a price war,” Ho said. “By doing the retention deal, they’re kind of containing it in a way.”
  

T-Mobile USA drops unlimited voice plan to $50* - RCR Wireless News

Blogged with Flock

Why eBay Should Accept Skype Founders’ Buyout Offer
 
Om Malik | Sunday, April 12, 2009 | 10:01 PM PT
 
Over the weekend, The New York Times reported that Skype founders Niklas Zennstrom and Janus Friis were in talks with private equity groups to raise about $1 billion and buy their Internet calling service back from eBay. They sold the company to eBay in 2006 for $2.6 billion and later got another $500 million as a final settlement. To say that the eBay-Skype merger was royally botched would be a bit of an understatement. It’s hardly a surprise that eBay CEO John Donhaue is looking to get rid of the $3.1-billion noose put around eBay’s neck by his former boss, Meg Whitman. Whitman signed off on a deal that essentially allowed Niklas and Janus to walk away with the core P2P technology that makes Skype work. Joltid, a holding company controlled by Niklas and Janus, sued eBay earlier this month, and Skype has in turn sued Joltid. I can’t help but notice this paragraph in an eBay 8-K filing.
 

Although Skype is confident of its legal position, as with any litigation there is the possibility of an adverse result if the matter is not resolved through negotiation. In such event, Skype would be adversely affected and the continued operation of Skype’s business as currently conducted would likely not be possible.

 
With this litigation hanging over its head, eBay’s hands maybe tied when it comes to Skype’s future. For instance, it can kiss a spinout offering on the stock markets goodbye. With the exception of Google and Microsoft, there aren’t any serious buyers who have deep enough pockets to pay eBay the cash and keep Skype going. And with this litigation, who would take a flyer on Skype? The buyout offer from the founders might seem like an episode of the hit British series “Hustle,” but it could be a good offer nonetheless.
 
I spoke to a few ex-Skypers, and they tell me if the dynamic duo did buy the company, they would love to go back to work for the startup that changed the phone landscape. As I have said previously — somewhere around $1 billion is actually a fair price for Skype. According to analysts, eBay wants about $1.7 billion for Skype.
 
Skype has about 405 million subscribers, and it now accounts for about 8 percent of international long-distance traffic. It had $550 million in revenues for 2008. It has started to expand into business markets, and the company has finally started to take the mobile opportunity seriously. It’s also one of the fastest-growing apps on Apple’s iPhone/iPod touch platform. A version for WiFi-enabled BlackBerrys is coming in May. The bad news is that, sooner rather than later, Skype’s growth is going to hit a ceiling.
 
At that point, Skype needs to start thinking beyond offering cheap calling and transform itself into a more innovative service that leverages the 400-million-strong installed base. For instance, it could easily become a content distribution service. It would also need to figure out how to work with other, more modern communication platforms such as Twitter and Facebook.
 
If Niklas and Janus do indeed pull it off, I would have one piece of advice for them: keep Skype CEO Josh Silverman around, preferably in the current role. They should focus on technology, vision and strategy for the company. What advice would you give Niklas and Janus? What do you think Skype can do to evolve and adapt for the future?
 

Why eBay Should Accept Skype Founders’ Buyout Offer

Blogged with the Flock Browser

eBay to spin off Skype in 2010
 
by Dan Moren - Wed Apr 15, 2009 12:21PM EDT
 
I’ll admit to being a little puzzled when Internet auction giant eBay acquired voice-over-IP company Skype back in 2005. Sure, Skype was a neat little operation, and at a cost of $2.6 billion, it seemed clear that it was worth something, but it never quite made sense—not like eBay’s acquisition of PayPal, for example, which meshes neatly with eBay’s bread-and-butter.
 
And indeed, it appears that things weren’t completely rosy in the small nation of SkypeBay. On Tuesday, eBay announced that it would be spinning off Skype and launching an initial public offering (IPO) in the first half of 2010. In the press release, CEO John Donahoe said that the two companies had “limited synergies”—in other words, they’re breaking up because they didn’t have enough in common.
 
Skype is arguably the most prominent VoIP company around. It boasts more than 400 million subscribers and its recently released iPhone client made a big splash, with more than 1 million copies downloaded in the first thirty-six hours of its availability.
 
Skype’s been doing well for itself, with revenues of $551 million in 2008, and it seems likely that revenue will continue to trend upwards, forecasting revenuve of $1 billion in 2011—a tempting target for a stock offering. The company has a lot of potential for growth, even more so if appeals to the FCC and European Union to open up the telecommunication field bear fruit.
 

eBay to spin off Skype in 2010 by Macworld.com: Yahoo! Tech

Blogged with the Flock Browser

EBay plans IPO for Skype, undoing $2.6B-plus deal
 
by RACHEL METZ, AP Technology Writer - Tue Apr 14, 2009 7:12PM EDT
 
NEW YORK -EBay Inc. plans to spin off its Internet communications service Skype through an initial public offering, undoing a $2.6 billion acquisition that puzzled analysts and eBay struggled to justify.
 
San Jose, Calif.-based eBay said Tuesday it expects to complete the IPO in the first half of next year, though it said the timing will be based on market conditions.
 
EBay bought Skype for $2.6 billion in 2005 — and later had to pay some of Skype's investors $530 million because the division met certain targets for profit and growth. Many analysts questioned the high price because it was unclear why eBay needed to own a service that lets people make free or cheap voice and video calls on computers and cell phones. Skype was founded by Niklas Zennstrom and Janus Friis, creators of the music downloading service Kazaa, which had riled the recording industry.
 
EBay had hoped that buyers and sellers on its online marketplace would use Skype to communicate. That didn't catch on, and eBay took a $900 million write-down on the business in 2007, essentially acknowledging it had drastically overvalued it.
 
When John Donahoe replaced Meg Whitman as chief executive in April 2008, eBay said it would re-evaluate Skype's role in the company. In a statement Tuesday, Donahoe said it's clear Skype has "limited synergies" with eBay and its payment service, PayPal.
 
Despite eBay's inability to fully integrate Skype with its core businesses, the unit has posted rapid growth: At the end of 2008, Skype had 405 million registered users, up 47 percent from 2007. Revenue totaled $551 million in 2008, up 44 percent from 2007. EBay expects Skype to post more than $1 billion in revenue by 2011.
 
EBay spokesman Alan Marks said that Skype's management, including its president, Josh Silverman, is expected to stay in place.Lazard Capital Markets analyst Colin Sebastian called eBay's plan to spin off Skype a "good move" because it fits with eBay's broader plans to focus on improving its marketplace and keeping pace with e-commerce rivals.
 
"It's all consistent with their effort to produce a long-term turnaround," Sebastian said.
 
The announcement about Skype came a day after two founders of Web content recommendation service StumbleUpon said they had bought the company back from eBay, which had purchased it two years ago for $75 million. The price the founders paid eBay to regain the company was not disclosed.
  
EBay's plans for Skype could be hampered by the economy. The number of companies that have priced IPOs has dried up: According to Renaissance Capital's IPOHome.com, there were 43 IPOs in 2008, compared with 272 in 2007. There were only two in the first quarter of this year.
 
Earlier Tuesday, eBay announced it would change some of the ways sellers list items on its site. Beginning in June, eBay will let sellers charge various prices for similar products sold under one listing, like shirts of different sizes.
 
EBay shares rose 46 cents, or 3.2 percent, in after-hours trading, after finishing regular trading down 25 cents at $14.38.
 

EBay plans IPO for Skype, undoing $2.6B-plus deal by AP: Yahoo! Tech

Blogged with the Flock Browser

EU to sue Britain over Internet privacy
  
by AOIFE WHITE, AP Business Writer - Tue Apr 14, 2009 12:15PM EDT
  
BRUSSELS -The European Union started legal action against Britain on Tuesday for not applying EU data privacy rules that would restrict an Internet advertising tracker, called Phorm, from watching how users surf the web.
 
The EU regulators also warned that they could force social networking sites like Facebook or MySpace to hide minors' profiles from search engines.
 
The European Commission said Britain should outlaw Internet traffic interception and monitoring unless users give explicit consent that their behavior can be tracked and analyzed.
 
It said it had received numerous complaints about BT Group PLC, which tested Phorm in 2006 and 2007 without informing customers involved in the trial. Phorm analyzes Internet users' behavior so it can target them with advertising that might appeal to them.
  
"Such a technology in the view of the European Commission and European data protection law can only be used with the prior consent of the user," said EU spokesman Martin Selmayr.
 
Regulators sent a first legal warning to Britain on Tuesday, asking it to explain or change the way it interprets EU rules, because it currently allows interception when it is unintentional or when a tracker has 'reasonable grounds' to believe that consent was given.
 
Britain has two months to reply. The European Commission can issue more warnings before it can take a government before an EU court, where it may be ordered to change national law or face daily fines.
 
BT sought consent from users when it again tried out Phorm from October to December 2008 in an invitation-only trial. The company says on its Web site that the trial didn't keep or pass on information that could identify users and what they did. It gave no comment on Tuesday on the EU statement.
 
Internet companies, privacy advocates and regulators disagree on what kind of traffic data is personal — such as IP addresses that give a location — and whether storing information on a crowd of people might evade strict privacy rules because they cannot be identified individually.
 
Phorm plans to work with three Internet operators reaching 70 percent of Britain's broadband market — BT Group PLC, Virgin Media Inc. and Carphone Warehouse Group PLC's TalkTalk. Virgin and TalkTalk said they wanted to try out the technology but would do so only with users' consent.
 
Phorm said in a statement that its technology did not store personal data or browsing history and was "fully compliant with UK legislation and relevant EU directives." It said it did not expect that the EU action against Britain would have any impact on its plans.
 
"In anticipation of any changes that may be made to the law in future, our system offers unmissable notice and clear and persistent choice to consumers," it said.
 
Britain's Information Commissioner's Office, which is charged with protecting personal information in the country, said it could not comment on the EU move.
 
Separately, EU Media Commissioner Viviane Reding said that social networking sites needed to move fast to step up default privacy settings, especially for younger users — and she would table new EU rules if sites didn't act.
 
"Is every social networker really aware that technically, all pictures and information uploaded on social networking profiles can be accessed and used by anyone on the web?" she asked in a video message.
 
"Do we not cross the border of the acceptable when, for example, the pictures of the Winnenden school shooting victims in Germany are used by commercial publications just to increase sales?"
 
She also warned about radio frequency identification, or RFID, tags that can be used as an electronic label on clothing or food to pass on information such as expiry dates or prices to a store cashier or stock checker.
 
"No European should carry a chip in one of their possessions without being informed precisely what they are used for, with the choice to remove or switch it off at any time," she said.
 
Stores and other smart tag users complain that some of these requirements to inform customers or switch off the tags could be burdensome, unnecessary and might prevent them from investing in the new technology.
 
on The Net:
EU video message on data privacy:
http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/reding/video/index_en.htm
 
Associated Press writer Raphael G. Satter in London contributed to this story.
 

EU to sue Britain over Internet privacy by AP: Yahoo! Tech

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Former Qwest CEO Heads to Jail
   
by Nancy Gohring, IDG News Service - Tue Apr 14, 2009 7:30PM EDT
   
The outspoken former head of Qwest, who executed a bold merger between the broadband service provider and a local telephone company, reported to prison on Tuesday.
 
Joseph Nacchio's last-ditch attempt to avoid jail failed when U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer denied his application for bail and a temporary stay. That means he'll await his appeal from prison.
 
Nacchio reported to prison at the Schuylkill Satellite Camp in Minersville, Pennsylvania, on Tuesday morning, the U.S. Department of Justice said.
 
It's barely a year since a jury found Nacchio guilty of 19 counts of insider trading and sentenced him to six years in prison. They found that while he was publicly forecasting strong growth for Qwest as CEO in 2001, he was selling off his own stock in the company because he knew it was struggling.
 
The merger of Qwest and US West was a difficult one that required lengthy dealings with state and federal governments because it involved a local phone company. Nacchio and Sol Trujillo, then CEO of US West, sometimes butted heads publicly as closing the deal dragged on.
 
Nacchio was also unpopular with some employees. He laid off thousands of workers after the merger and sometimes repeated the "U.S. worst" nickname for US West, angering people who had worked for the local phone company for many years.
 
Nacchio was replaced as CEO in 2002 as the company struggled under a crippling debt load and a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission investigation into its accounting practices.
 

Former Qwest CEO Heads to Jail by PC World: Yahoo! Tech

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Space: The final frontier for cell phones?
   
by PETER SVENSSON, AP Technology Writer - Thu Apr 9, 2009 5:28PM EDT
     
The vast, thinly populated expanses of the country that still lack cell phone coverage could be getting an interesting option next year: ordinary-looking cell phones that connect to a satellite when there's no cell tower around.
  
In June, a rocket is scheduled to lift the largest commercial satellite yet into space. In orbit 22,000 miles above the Earth, the satellite will unfurl an umbrella of gold mesh 60 feet across and aim it at the U.S. That gigantic antenna will let the satellite pick up signals from phones that are not much larger than regular cell phones.
   
That satellite, from TerreStar Corp., is due to be followed by two similar, even larger ones from SkyTerra Communications Inc. next year. SkyTerra puts the cost of its satellites at $1.2 billion.
   
On the face of it, these are bold moves, especially considering that the satellite phone business has been troubled. Most famously, two companies with grand projects for worldwide satellite phone coverage, Iridium and Globalstar, filed for bankruptcy at the beginning of the decade, wiping out billions in investor capital.
   
But the background to the new launches is more complicated, and analysts say the business models of TerreStar and SkyTerra ultimately might rely more on the companies becoming acquisition targets for conventional wireless carriers.
   
There's plenty of competition in satellite phones, even though it's a niche market. Iridium and Globalstar are still in operation, providing last-resort communications for the military, forest wardens and others who can afford to buy dedicated, bulky satellite handsets for $1,000 and up. Inmarsat offers a third alternative.
  
Even so, SkyTerra and TerreStar say their new satellites, combined with advances in chip technology, can take "satphones" into the mainstream — devices you'd buy in an AT&T store.
   
The ability to call via satellite will be marketed as "an insurance policy or peace-of-mind feature," said SkyTerra spokesman Tom Surface.
   
The first handsets for TerreStar's satellite would cost about $700, said TerreStar chief executive Jeff Epstein. At a cell phone trade show here last week, the company displayed a prototype built by small Finnish company, Elektrobit. The phone has a QWERTY keyboard and runs Windows Mobile software, making it similar to many BlackBerry-style, e-mail-oriented phones for corporate use, but a bit thicker. Unlike Iridium and Globalstar phones, there's no protruding antenna.
   
"This way, you take your BlackBerry and you replace it with that device," Epstein said.
  
Both companies indicate that calling over a satellite will cost less than $1 per minute, the approximate price of Iridium calls. TerreStar also has a roaming agreement with AT&T Inc. for calls that don't go through the satellite, and expects the combined satellite and ground system to be working before the end of this year.
  
However, neither TerreStar or SkyTerra will replicate Iridium's worldwide coverage. The phones will work in North America only. Nor will they be getting away from a significant limitation of satellite phones: The handsets need to be in clear view of a satellite. In other words, the satellite service will work only outdoors, and a hill, tree or building obscuring the southern sky can be a problem, especially if you're far north.
  
Given these limitations, and the steady expansion of ground-based networks, is there really a mass demand for satellite phones?
 
Satellite analyst and consultant Tim Farrar at TMF Associates is skeptical. He believes the number of people interested in satellite calling, even if just for emergencies, is small compared to the overall cell phone market.
   
"They need hundreds of thousands and more likely millions of users of these handsets to make it into the mainstream," he said. "You have to gain an awful lot of momentum before manufacturers will consider it worthwhile to build this into their handsets."
   
Farrar thinks marketing will be a challenge too. For mainstream adoption, sales representatives at cell phone stores would have to get customers to accept that the satellite connectivity would work only outdoors.
     
"Last time around, people tried out Iridium phones, and thought `What use is this to me if I have to go out and stand in the middle of a field to make a call?'" he said.
    
Given these obstacles, Farrar believes the value of SkyTerra and TerreStar is in their spectrum holdings. The companies have permission from the Federal Communications Commission to use slices of the airwaves for both satellite and ground-based networks, as long as they have a satellite in orbit. The government hoped that such hybrid space-terrestrial licenses would encourage companies to provide emergency satellite coverage when cell towers are knocked out by disasters like Hurricane Katrina.
    
For now SkyTerra and TerreStar aren't using their spectrum for ground-based communications. Eventually, the companies could try to put the airwaves to use with their own cell towers on the ground — or they could use that spectrum to entice a carrier like AT&T or Verizon Wireless. Those companies would normally have to pay billions for spectrum with nationwide coverage, but they might find that snapping up one of these satellite companies is a cheaper way to get that access, said Armand Musey, a satellite consultant.
   
Investors aren't optimistic: Terrestar, which is listed on the Nasdaq, has a market capitalization of $72 million, which is paltry compared to the cost of its satellite system. SkyTerra is privately held.
  
"There certainly is not a market for having all of these companies — TerreStar, SkyTerra, Inmarsat, Iridium — all operating satellite-only," Musey said. "The market is just not that big."
  
On the Net:
http://www.skyterra.com
http://www.terrestar.com

Space: The final frontier for cell phones? by AP: Yahoo! Tech

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Service Restored After AT&T Fiber Cut

by Stephen Lawson, IDG News Service - Sat Apr 11, 2009 5:31PM EDT

The fiber cut that shut off phone and Internet service to thousands of San Francisco Bay Area residents on Thursday was fixed overnight, according to AT&T.

Service has been restored to fixed and mobile customers of AT&T, Verizon and Sprint Nextel, according to the carriers. All of the affected Verizon users were back up and running by about 1 a.m. Friday, said Verizon spokesman Jon Davies. Sprint rerouted traffic on Thursday for its affected customers.

Underground cables belonging to AT&T in San Jose and some belonging to AT&T and Sprint in San Carlos were cut early Thursday morning. The cuts affected an undisclosed number of AT&T customers, mostly in southern San Jose and communities to the south, as well as about 52,000 Verizon subscribers and some customers of Sprint's IP (Internet Protocol) data service for businesses. Two major IBM facilities in southern San Jose were effectively shut down by the cuts, which also had a minor effect on an organization in charge of Internet domain names.

Police are investigating the incident as possible vandalism, and AT&T on Friday increased a reward for information from US$100,000 to $250,000. The reward offer already brought in many calls to San Jose police on Thursday, and the department is pursuing several leads, according to police spokesman Ronnie Lopez.

Whoever cut the fiber would have had to remove heavy manhole covers and use cutting tools to sever thick cables that each contain many strands of optical fiber, AT&T said. Such cases are rare, according to the carrier. But the incident raises the question of how secure carriers' optical lines are. Internet and phone users ultimately rely on underground fiber for connectivity to the Internet in most cases.

It's hard to make any infrastructure absolutely secure, Gartner analyst Ken Dulaney said.

"Like most mission-critical things today, if you are bent on destroying something, then you can do it," Dulaney said. "All this means is that there is going to be a big market for cameras, going forward."

Service Restored After AT&T Fiber Cut by PC World: Yahoo! Tech

Blogged with Flock

Time Warner Ponders 100GB Cap, Twitters Its Critics
       
by Chloe Albanesius - PC Magazine - Thu Apr 9, 2009 9:15AM EDT
       
Amidst backlash over Time Warner Cable's tentative plan for a 40GB broadband cap, the company said this week that it will offer an additional 100GB tier for heavy users.
      
Pricing for this "super tier" has not been revealed. The company is currently testing four pricing tiers in Texas, North Carolina, and New York: 5, 10, 20, and 40GB with a prices ranging from $29.95 to $54.90 per month. Customers will be charged $1 for every extra GB they consume.
      
In October, Comcast imposed a residential bandwidth cap of 250GB. AT&T is currently testing a 150GB cap in Reno, Nev. and Beaumont, Texas – the same market where Time Warner kicked off its bandwidth cap test.
      
How much do you consume? Watching streaming video from Hulu.com eats up about 2.5 Mbps, while making a call with Skype or Vonage takes up 131 Kbps, and streaming music uses 129 kbps. Popular HD offerings, however, are much bigger bandwidth hogs.Time Warner's bandwidth caps, therefore, are relatively low compared to Comcast and even AT&T, prompting some subscriber backlash.
         
"We have heard customer feedback, and understand that a 40GB tier seems low to heavy Internet users," Landel Hobbs, chief operating officer at Time Warner, said in a statement earlier this week.
    
"We are developing a 'super – tier' now that allows for up to 100GB of broadband usage per month in all of our test markets," Hobbs continued. "We haven't confirmed pricing details as of this moment, but you have my word as Chief Operating Officer of Time Warner Cable that we will make this tier available to our customers."
         
Customers will be provided with a "gas gauge" tool to figure out how much bandwidth they are consuming, and move to a higher tier if necessary.
      
"Furthermore, I am convening a series of meetings this week to develop plans that will allow customers to choose among tiers that provide tradeoffs between speed and consumption," Hobbs said. "If one family prefers to have lower download speeds but a higher data tier, or vice-versa, we want them to be able to make that choice."
       
Details on this option are still "fuzzy," he said, but Hobbs believes these options are "fair" and will "encourage more use of broadband overall.
      
"Hobbs stressed that its bandwidth cap efforts are still in the testing phase, and nothing is set in stone. But like it or not, bandwidth caps will be imposed. Time Warner chairman and chief executive Glenn Britt told attendees at last week's Cable Show in Washington, D.C. that "if you want to consume more, fine, just pay more."
      
Bandwidth caps will hit Texas customers "in late summer," Melissa C. Sorola, regional director of communications for Texas, said in an April 1 statement. Customers will also be given a three-month grace period to monitor their bandwidth usage and pick the best plan that works for them before penalties for over-usage will be applied, she said.
      
"We've been trialing consumption based billing in Beaumont, Texas for several months now. This test has been successful and we now know we can make this work from a technical perspective to accurately measure our customers' consumption," Sorola said.
       
Hoping to stop the effort is Rep. Eric Massa, a New York Democrat, who branded the caps as "an ill-conceived test marketing plan."
       
"Just at a time when access to information is driving our economic recovery, Time Warner is moving to stagnate the 21st century technology needed to rebuild America," Massa said in a statement. "I firmly oppose capping Internet usage and I will be taking a leadership role in stopping this outrageous, job killing initiative."
       
An anti-cap Web site – stopthecap.com – is also following the situation.
       
Much like Comcast utilized Twitter earlier this week to address its e-mail outage, Time Warner is also using the micro-blogging site to address questions and complaints about bandwidth caps.
       
Jeff Simmermon, director of digital communications, and Mariam Asmar, a PR coordinator for Time Warner, have been responding to Time Warner-related Tweets as @jeffTWC and @MsmarTWC.Replying directly to the Twitter faithful is apparently a draining experience."You're right. Everyone gets punchy when they're pounded like this -- I'm tired of being attacked, but I do need to rise above it," Simmermon wrote in response to a Tweet that accused him of being curt in his replies.Simmermon and Asmar are encouraging people with bandwidth complaints or suggestions longer than 140 characters to send an e-mail to realideas@twcable.com.
    

Time Warner Ponders 100GB Cap, Twitters Its Critics by PC Magazine: Yahoo! Tech

Blogged with Flock