Posted by: AT&T Blog Team on January 12, 2011 at 12:24 pm
For those six tech policy folks who were not able to trek to the Consumer Electronics Show in the desert last week, we have compiled some video clips for you. And, no, we did not include any footage of our activity at the tables! These are some highlights from the net neutrality panel last Thursday.
We’ll start with what everyone wants to know… moderator Cecilia Kang of The Washington Post asking Verizon’s Tom Tauke whether it will appeal the FCC’s Order. The clip also includes Tauke musing on the openness rules applied to its 700 MHz spectrum.
Posted by: Hank Hultquist on December 17, 2010 at 3:04 pm
Since November 30th, Level 3 has made five filings in the FCC’s Open Internet Proceeding in which it raised “net neutrality” concerns about the agreement it had previously reached to purchase connectivity from Comcast. Yesterday, Level 3’s CEO sent another letter to the FCC and the Department of Justice in which he urged the FCC to consider regulating broadband Internet access providers generally to deal with its concerns. The fact that Level 3 did not file its latest letter in the Open Internet docket (such a filing would be prohibited under the FCC’s sunshine rules) may indicate that Level 3 has abandoned its frivolous net neutrality claims.
In any case, this is a pretty remarkable call for regulation of Internet interconnection arrangements that have worked remarkably well without regulation. To try to justify this unprecedented regulatory intervention, Level 3 says that, absent regulation, ISPs can “coerce payments from broadband backbone and independent content providers” thanks to their “dominant control over access to their subscriber’s eyes and ears.”
Wait a minute. Up until now, last-mile ISPs have mostly been buyers rather than sellers of Internet interconnection services. If you ask me, there’s not much crazier in business than buying something that you could, according to Level 3, be selling. Apparently, ISPs have run up billions of dollars in unnecessary expenses that, in fact, could have been revenue. I understand how the buy/build dilemma works, but buy/sell seems like a no-brainer.
Posted by: AT&T Blog Team on December 1, 2010 at 11:18 am
Background – The FCC has announced that it will address proposed rules to preserve the open Internet at its December 21st Open Meeting. The following statement may be attributed to Jim Cicconi, AT&T Senior Executive Vice President of External & Legislative Affairs:
“The prospect of net neutrality regulation has lingered as a very real threat to industry investment and jobs for several years. Obviously, AT&T’s strong preference would be for the FCC to refrain from any regulation in the Internet space. We feel the industry’s track record, the utter absence of any specific ongoing problem, and the state of the economy all argue for regulatory restraint. We also believe, based on jurisdictional concerns, that the issue should rightly be deferred to the Congress, a view also expressed by a bipartisan majority of that body. Nonetheless, we recognize that the FCC has decided to move ahead.
“We understand that the FCC Chairman has prepared a compromise proposal aimed at bridging the differences that have long polarized this debate. Based on our understandings, this measure would avoid onerous Title II regulation; would be narrowly drawn along the lines of a compromise we have endorsed previously; would reject limits on our ability to properly manage our network and efficiently utilize our wireless spectrum; would recognize the capabilities and limitations of different broadband technologies; would ensure specialized services are protected against intrusive regulation; and would provide for a case-by-case resolution of complaints that also encourages non-governmental dispute settlement.
“While any final statement of position by AT&T must await a careful reading of the actual order and rules when issued, we are pleased that the FCC appears to be embracing a compromise solution that is sensitive to the dynamics of investment in a difficult economy and appears to avoid over-regulation. We are also mindful of, and grateful for, the impact Congressional views have had in this process. Such an approach would reduce regulatory uncertainty, and should encourage investment and innovation in next generation broadband services and technologies. In that regard, we remain committed to working with the FCC to bring the benefits of broadband to all Americans.”
