Analysis & commentary on America's troubled transition from analog telephone service to digital advanced telecommunications and associated infrastructure deficits.
Tuesday, July 08, 2008
Palo Alto fiber project represents important test of open access concept
The open access model is emerging as a public/private initiative to build out broadband faster than the proprietary infrastructure owned and operated by telcos and cable companies which are unable and/or unwilling to invest in upgrading their plants. The latter have resisted open access initiatives by local governments, arguing they represent unfair competition and in some cases have gone to the courts to seek to halt the projects.
That's a poor strategy because the telcos and cable companies would benefit from open access fiber projects since they could sell customers improved IP-based services faster than they might otherwise could since it would take far longer for them to build their own proprietary fiber infrastructures. By going to court to block or slow these projects, the telcos and cable companies are shooting themselves in the foot. They also risk provoking local governments to counter with eminent domain actions to take over aging and increasingly obsolete metal-wire based systems in the name of economic development.
Sunday, July 06, 2008
Vint Cerf: Single purpose phone, cable systems and legacy regulation impede broadband expansion
Cerf also pays homage to the notion that IP-based infrastructure is a natural monopoly like publicly owned roads and highways that by its nature does not lend itself to market competition:
You don't have multiple roads going to your house for example. Instead, it is a common resource. I said something like "maybe we should treat the Internet more like the road system."Cerf correctly notes that competition to deliver IP-based services isn't likely to develop among the legacy telco and cable providers since the old regulatory framework isn't designed to foster competition for them. He posits that like the early telephone system, subsidies will be needed to ensure universal access.
If broadband service is essential to the national economy and to citizens, given the present means by which it is implemented, and given that it appears unlikely that the usual competitive pressures will lead to discipline among the competitors, perhaps we need new national rules to assure that the service is openly and equally accessible to any application provider and to all users. Equal does not mean that everyone pays the same amount. In particular, higher capacity might be priced at a higher rate. Provision needs to be made, however, to deal with high cost (to the provider) areas using a new form of Universal Service or some other subsidy.
Saturday, July 05, 2008
Palo Alto moves forward with open access fiber
After more starts and stops than a dial-up connection, ultra-high-speed broadband Internet may soon be feasible in Palo Alto.
In a new business plan recently submitted to city staff, a group of companies proposed funding and constructing an open network capable of delivering cutting-edge communications, including voice, data and video services.
The city council will review the plan at a study session on Monday and will direct staff later this month whether to move forward with the project.
The new network would have the capability of delivering Internet to residents at a speed of 100 megabits per second. In contrast, a regular broadband service sends out information at a speed of two-tenths of a megabit per second, said Palo Alto resident Bob Harrington, one of three council-appointed citizens advising on the project.
This is the kind of thing I like to see: solid steps toward actually building broadband infrastructure in a public private partnership instead of useless projects by telco-funded nonprofits to study broadband black holes and aggregate demand, as if the latter activity is going to have any influence whatsoever on telcos' broadband depolyment plans. It doesn't as shown by numerous petition drives directed at telcos and cable companies over the past several years by folks who are still waiting in vain for high speed Internet.
Funding these nonprofits are merely cynical PR efforts by the telcos to paper over their sprawling broadband black holes and give the impression they are "concerned" about the lack of broadband access, costing them very little money relative to the real dollars they would have to invest to bring their infrastructures into the modern digital age.
Wednesday, July 02, 2008
Louisiana city to mount legal challenge of state video franchise law
At least a dozen states have preempted local governments by enacting video franchise legislation. The legislation was sought by telcos wanting to compete with traditional cable companies but fearful local officials would require them to provide access to all residents and not engage in digital redlining.
Read the story here.
Saturday, June 28, 2008
Costly oil will fuel public policy push for universal broadband access
I predict that if this unpleasant circumstance comes about, it will provide a big boost to telecommuting and other forms of using telecommunications technology to bridge distances rather than fuel consuming transportation. That in turn will create a major public policy push for rapidly upgrading the nation's incomplete telecommunications infrastructure to ensure every American has access to high speed Internet -- possibly on the scale of the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956 -- only this time involving fiber optic cable instead of concrete and blacktop.
On July 16, 2008, Virginia Gov. Timothy M. Kaine citing rising fuel prices and the escalating cost of commuting to work, announced a telework initiative for gubernatorial appointees, which includes about 120 employees in the Cabinet and Governor's Office. Kaine also announced an improved State Telework Policy directing all state agencies to consider ways to improve and expand agency telework and alternate work schedule programs.
In order for telework initiatives like Kaine's to work, Virginia and other states will have to ensure that their telecommunications infrastructures provide broadband access to all state residents. That means policies and incentives to rapidly deploy infrastructure to make telework possible and not simply engaging in studies and mapping broadband black holes that don't result in wider broadband access. Rising pump prices will likely add the necessary extra incentive to show real and timely progress.
Friday, June 27, 2008
U.S. Court of Appeals upholds FCC rule legitimizing broadband black holes
The rule is designed to stop local governments from using their FCC cable franchise granting authority to impose build out requirements on franchise applicants, preserving broadband black holes in these communities.
Here are the relevant excerpts from a previous post on the FCC rule.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
U.S. suffers from "Neanderthal" broadband policy, critic charges
"That Neanderthal philosophy has governed for about eight years, and it has allowed us to slide from a leader in this field to an abysmal position," Lessig said in a clear attack on the Bush administration's stance.
Vint Cerf, Google's chief technology evangelist and one of the architects of the Internet, implied that one of the key reasons for the lack of universal broadband access in the U.S. is that that the Internet, which carries multiple and unlimited forms of digital communications, is delivered by telcos and cable companies interested less in providing Internet access and more in selling particular services such as video and voice telephone connections.
Supreme Court to hear AT&T DSL anti-trust case
More than two decades ago, a federal judge ordered the breakup of AT&T after concluding Ma Bell's monopolistic control of local and long distance voice telephone service violated federal anti-trust law.
Now AT&T as the successor to SBC Communications faces another anti-trust suit that the U.S. Supreme Court decided to take up this week. The high court will review a Sept. 11, 2007 decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal in which the appellate court affirmed a U.S. district court ruling allowing an anti-trust action brought against SBC/AT&T by several Internet service providers to proceed.
The ISPs allege SBC/AT&T maintained unreasonably high wholesale access charges to ISPs to deliberately thwart them from competing with SBC/AT&T for Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) customers as permitted under the line sharing provisions of the federal Telecommunications Reform Act of 1996. Ma Bell then lowballed prices on her own DSL offerings, making it impossible for the ISPs to compete on price, the ISP plaintiffs complain.
The case, Linkline Communications et. al. v. SBC California, et. al. represents an important test of federal policy under the 1996 law intended to foster robust market competition and speed timely deployment of high speed Internet access to all Americans.
However the suit suggests SBC/AT&T's actions in response to the law have had just the opposite effect. By cutting its DSL prices to the bone in order to deter competing ISPs -- SBC/AT&T was promoting residential DSL for as little as $13 a month in late 2006-- it lacked adequate revenue to finance the expansion of DSL within its service territory. That led to the formation of monstrous broadband black holes filled with frustrated customers unable to order wireline broadband from AT&T at any price.