El Dorado County economic development chief calls Internet access key

Sam Driggers, installed earlier this year as El Dorado County's economic development director, told county supervisors this week that having good Internet access is key to the county's economic health. Moreover, Driggers suggested, a higher quality of life that can be had outside urban areas should not mean going without broadband:

Driggers said El Dorado County appeals to people who want to get away from the hustle and bustle of more urban regions.

"People want to live in quality-of-life areas, but they also want to work. It's in tandem," he said, and Internet access is key. "If you don't have broadband, you don't have access to the world."

Your blogger and El Dorado County home-based business operator is heartened by Driggers' remarks to the board and hopes the supes give them the serious consideration they deserve.

To underscore Driggers' efforts to get his bosses to view the county's telecommunications infrastructure as being as vital as highways, water and power when it comes to the county's economic health, I urge county residents to sign this petition. It calls on the supervisors to direct county staff and retain necessary outside consultants to establish a public private partnership with fiber optic telecommunications vendors to utilize county rights to way to construct open access fiber to the node/neighborhood (FTTN) infrastructure to serve the current and future telecommunications needs of residents and businesses situated within unincorporated El Dorado County.

AT&T offers fixed terrestrial wireless broadband

AT&T is now offering fixed terrestrial wireless "broadband" connections where it doesn't provide wireline-based Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) service in addition to reselling WildBlue's satellite Internet service.

According to a customer service representative I spoke with today, the service offers speeds of 400-700 Kbs down and 250-300 Kbs up for $59.95 per month plus a $99 installation charge which includes a computer adapter card interface. Not quite broadband in this blogger's definition of 1.5 Mbs and higher, but certainly better than dial up. Ma Bell is offering a 30 day trial period for new customers, who can cancel if the service doesn't live up to their expectations.

This development comes as AT&T increases its fixed terrestrial broadband presence, deploying WiMAX-based offerings in Alaska and in the former BellSouth territory it acquired earlier this year, as well as spending $2.5 billion to acquire additional wireless radio spectrum, according to this AP dispatch today.

AT&T's foray into fixed terrestrial wireless isn't likely to offer Ma Bell a competitive edge over Wireless Internet Service Providers (WISPs) who are moving to fill the many broadband black holes in locales like El Dorado County, California. Wireless broadband offerings by El Dorado County WISPs Remotely Located and Sierra Advantage offer a greater range of choices -- including significantly higher connection speeds -- that equal and exceed AT&T's fixed terrestrial wireless offering based on speed and price. The only way AT&T can hope to compete with these emerging WISPs is to battle them on the ground by upgrading its wireline infrastructure to allow it to reliably offer higher speed connections for comparatively lower prices. So far, there's no indication it's willing to make the necessary investment, leaving the market wide open for the WISPs.

Peter Bernstein: Telcos and cable companies should deprivatize local infrastructure

Peter Bernstein correctly notes the telco/cable duopoly doesn't want to invest in infrastructure, especially over the "last mile" or two before it reaches the subscriber. Instead, telcos and cable companies want to deliver -- and bill -- for broadband-based services -- TV, voice or Internet access. Bernstein proposes the telcos and cables companies sell off their local infrastructures to local governmental entities to be operated as public utilities:

Telcos and cable companies don't really want to install, manage and maintain “plumbing.” The days when customer control was asserted because access to all services came through a monopoly access network ended with the mass adoption of the Internet. Voice over IP and wireless are just the nails in the coffin.

Why not have the service providers divest their outside plant and local switches? Local or regional authorities could regulate them and, perish the thought, really do the job.

FCC to retest white spaces devices

The Federal Communications Commission will retest several prototype devices developed by a high tech consortium to transmit long range wireless broadband over unused portions of the TV broadcast spectrum called "white spaces," Broadcasting & Cable reports. The devices failed testing earlier this year to determine if they would interfere with TV and wireless microphone signals.

The devices developed by the White Spaces Coalition, which includes Microsoft, Google, Dell, HP, Intel, Earthlink and Phillips represent a potentially "disruptive technology" that can bypass the telco/cable duopoly and bring broadband to areas unserved by telcos and cable companies.

AT&T signals end of wireline copper-cable based system outside of urban areas

AT&T appears to be moving toward a wireless future outside of urban centers where the telco is upgrading its wireline plant and deploying its hybrid fiber/copper Project Lightspeed/U-Verse equipment. AT&T is currently test deploying fixed terrestrial WiMAX broadband in parts of Alaska and 22 other regions in the lower 48 states, apparently as an alternative to making upgrades to its wireline copper cable plant or replacing the copper with fiber in order to provide broadband-based services.

This week, an AT&T executive disclosed Ma Bell plans to ultimately shut down its existing voice network and replace it with a VOIP (Voice Over Internet Protocol) system in metro areas where U-Verse is being deployed.

Those not in these areas might have to wait a long time to get U-Verse VOIP service, Ralph de la Vega, AT&T's group president, regional telecommunications and entertainment, told Investor's Business Daily. Taken in combination with AT&T's move into fixed terrestrial wireless in less densely populated parts of its service area where U-Verse isn't present, it's unlikely they'll ever be offered wireline-based VOIP. All broadband-based services will likely be delivered via fixed terrestrial wireless as the aging copper cable plant and central offices built for the era of analog, plain old telephone service (POTS) are dismantled.

Sen. Kerry deplores 'unacceptable" state of U.S. broadband access

"It’s almost hard to wrap your head around the fact that 7 years into this century, more Americans than not have either no Internet access at all or are still stuck on dial-up. It seems like so long ago that the buzzword was the “information super-highway,” but much of America is still bouncing down a country lane. That is just unacceptable."

WISPs endeavor to provide needed broadband "third pipe" in El Dorado County

The pathetic state of wireline broadband Internet access in El Dorado County, California has spawned locally based Wireless Internet Service Providers (WISPs) to provide a much needed "third pipe" for county residents and small businesses who have been stiff armed for years by AT&T and Comcast.

Startup Remotely Located run by Jason and Jennifer Wilson is deploying Wi-Fi based service using both directional and non-directional transmission technology. Remotely Located is serving areas deprived of wireline broadband service in the Mosquito/Swansboro Country area and has recently expanded into West Camino and your blogger's neighborhood.

Sierra Advantage emerged out of the bankruptcy earlier this year of one of El Dorado County's first ISPs, Direct Connect. According to the WISP's service area map, it covers my area. Not quite yet, according to Brett Patterson, director of sales for Shingle Springs-based Sierra Advantage. "We continue to build out our network and get closer each week to offering you service," Patterson wrote in an email yesterday. "Soon we will have additional equipment up in your area. There are some very exciting, positive changes coming for us regarding our Internet services."

My hat's off to these WISPs. Providing fixed terrestrial wireless Internet access in El Dorado County's rugged terrain where steep canyons and tall trees create obstacles for wireless signals is no easy feat.

Aside from overcoming these technological hurdles and providing reliable service at advertised throughput speeds, a key challenge as they add customers will be obtaining sufficient backhaul connections to the Internet -- wireline circuits capable of providing large amounts of bandwidth -- to accomodate the growth. Subscribers won't be pleased if a bandwidth traffic jam at the backhaul makes their speeds slow to a crawl and drag with the high latency that afflicts substandard satellite-based Internet access.

Readers who subscribe to services offered by these WISPS are invited to share their experiences and satisfaction with them by posting comments to this post.

Telcos protest California PUC's draft build out requirements

When telcos advocated the enactment of California's Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act of 2006, they argued it would create a more competitive marketplace and speed the deployment of broadband-based telecommunications services to consumers.

However, judging from their recently filed comments on the California Public Utilities Commission's proposed rules implementing the statute's build out requirements, telcos could hardly be described as in a hurry to expand their systems and heartily embracing an open, competitive market.

They protest draft rules that would require franchisees to include "clearly stated build-out milestones " that "demonstrate a serious and realistic planning effort." In addition, the draft rules would require franchisees to "clearly state the constraints affecting the build-out" and "clearly delineate and explain" areas within the franchisee's service area that pose "substantially higher" costs.

The small telcos don't want to be held to the same build out requirements as the larger players like AT&T and Verizon. And the big guys don't want to provide customer data by census tract or report on how they are utilizing wireless technology to deliver broadband services.

One might think broadband providers would support regulation that actually encourages them to offer more services to greater numbers of customers. Nearly all other regulated industries desire this and typically complain regulation constrains their ability to offer new products and services to larger numbers of customers. But it's just the opposite in the perverse broadband marketplace. The providers want regulation that allows them to limit rather than expand their services and serve fewer rather than more customers. While providers may think less is more, less is truly less and explains why the United States is rapidly falling behind other developed parts of the world when it comes to broadband access and choices.

Report: AT&T to ramp up fixed terrestrial WiMAX service in 2008

Last month, AT&T announced it began deploying fixed terrestrial wireless broadband service in Alaska as part of an initiative to test the service, which utilizes WiMAX protocol, in 22 areas of the United States. Eight of those became what the telco in August termed "active commercial deployments."

Quoting an industry source, Unstrung is reporting that Ma Bell will ramp up the service in the second quarter of next year, most likely in the southern U.S. where AT&T has preexisting licenses for using the 2.3 GHz band to provide the wireless broadband service as an alternative to DSL or cable.

Unstrung's analysis is taken in combination with the Alaskan rollout last month, this move into the lower 48 suggests AT&T might use the technology to provide better broadband coverage in areas where it has less wireline infrastructure.

California PUC issues state franchise to Wave Broadband

The California Public Utilities Commission has issued a state broadband franchise to Seattle-based cable provider Wave Broadband. Wave Broadband joins Cox Communications as one of just two cable providers that have applied for and received a state franchise, issued under California's Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act of 2006.

Wave joins telcos AT&T and Verizon having received franchises from the California PUC. MIA is the state's biggest cable player, Comcast. The cable provider likely isn't all that interested in a state franchise with its limited build out requirements when local jurisdictions like El Dorado County already allow it to bypass large parts of the county, leaving consumers without access.

According to the CPUC franchise certificate issued on Sept. 7, Wave Broadband intends to provide service in the Northern California cities of Dixon, Loyalton, Portola, Rio Vista, West Sacramento and Plumas and Sierra counties. The company isn't talking when asked if it planned to serve other areas that currently are not offered broadband services by AT&T or Comcast.

FCC delays report on broadband access

For the past several years, the Federal Communications Commission each January and June has released data on the number of high speed telco and cable connections to the Internet. The most recent report was issued Jan. 31, 2007. As your blogger reported in early February, it revealed that local telephone companies failed to provide DSL in more than 20 percent of their service areas as of June 30, 2006.

The FCC report covering the last half of 2006 was due out in June. But it's been inexplicably delayed. An FCC spokesman assured me in a July 20, 2007 email that it would be released "soon" but it's still MIA nearly two months later. A likely explanation is the FCC is delaying the report's release at the behest of the telcos since it's likely to show that telcos have made little if any progress shrinking their massive broadband black holes during the last six months of 2006.

Federal appeals court rejects telco's bid to dismiss anti-trust action brought by competing ISPs

The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has rejected a bid by SBC Communications (now AT&T) to toss out a federal anti-trust action brought by four California Internet Service Providers (ISPs). The ISPs sued the telco claiming it jacked up wholesale prices charged competing ISPs for access to its lines in order to subject the ISPs to a "pricing squeeze" as part of a scheme to drive consumers to SBC's proprietary retail DSL services.

The federal appellate court decision affirms a U.S. district ruling that the suit could proceed as an anti-trust action under the Sherman Antitrust Act. SBC unsuccessfully argued that the action was barred by the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Verizon Communications, Inc. v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko, LLP, 540 U.S. 398 (2004). In Trinko, the Supreme Court held that the Sherman Act doesn't apply to Verizon's failure to deal fairly with a competing ISP. A customer of one of Verizon's competitors alleged Verizon engaged in anticompetitive practices by discriminatorily delaying orders placed by customers of Verizon’s competitors that Verizon was required to fill by the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996.

The Sept. 11 ruling comes as AT&T and other telcos have requested the Federal Communications Commission to relieve them from the requirement that they continue making their lines available to competing ISPs under the 1996 Act, according to this recent post at Broadband Reports.com. The FCC is expected to act on the requests this week.

The full ruling by the Ninth Circuit in Linkline Communications et. al. v. SBC California, et. al. can be read here.

FCC needs to get it right with wireless broadband

The Federal Communications Commission has to get the wireless "third pipe" of broadband Internet access right in order to inject meaningful market competition and consumer choice into the moribund, duopolistic market it has fostered with its wireline broadband policies, writes columnist Keith Girard of AllBusiness.com in The New York Times:

The FCC has made a mess of telecommunications policy. As FCC Commissioner Michael J. Copps noted recently, the nation is getting "too little broadband at too high a price."

Thanks to the FCC, Cable TV and telephone companies dominate the broadband market. They've basically skimmed the cream off the top by focusing on densely populated, easy-to-service areas. As a result, large parts of the country are underserviced. Only 31 percent of rural households and 41 percent of African American households have broadband service compared with 70 percent of households overall that have a computer, according to a new study by the Pew Internet Project, a nonprofit group. The same holds true for small rural businesses. They are less likely to use broadband services, in part, because of cost and lack of availability, according to several government studies.

America's growing broadband gap with Japan

In the 1980s, the United States fretted about a management gap with Japan. Japanese business management techniques such as kaizen -- continuous, systematic improvement -- and a focus on quality control fostered an inferiority complex on the part of American business leaders.

Now the U.S. is about to develop a new inferiority complex with the Japanese: it's fallen far behind Japan when it comes to broadband Internet, The Washington Post reports. "America may have invented the Internet but the Japanese are running away with it," the newspaper reports, noting that Japanese broadband service is eight to 30 times faster than in the U.S. Japan boasts the world's fastest Internet connections, delivering more data at a lower cost than anywhere else, The Post adds, citing recent studies.

Japan's speedy Internet access is helping the nation fulfill its goals of allowing more people to telecommute -- work from home -- and increasing the use of telemedicine, which allows doctors to remotely diagnose and evaluate a person's medical condition without the need for the patient to travel long distances to see a specialist.

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is interested in telemedicine and recently announced $25 million in grant funding for "expanding broadband capabilities to support telemedicine, tele-health and e-health programs."

Schwarzenegger has also formed a Broadband Task Force that is due to issue a report next month on the state of broadband access in California. What it will likely find is California, which likes to view itself as a leader in information technology and innovative public policies, is like the rest of the U.S., falling far behind Japan when it comes to broadband access, making it difficult for the governor to fulfill his goal of expanding telemedicine in the Golden State.

California PUC proposes broadband build out rules, wireless broadband reporting requirement

The California Public Utilities Commission has issued draft rules implementing the state's Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act's build out requirements for telcos and cable companies wishing to obtain a state franchise to offer broadband-based video services.

The draft rules require franchisees to include "clearly stated build-out milestones " that "demonstrate a serious and realistic planning effort." In addition, franchisees must "clearly state the constraints affecting the build-out" and "clearly delineate and explain" areas within the franchisee's service area that pose "substantially higher" costs.

The CPUC declined requests by consumer groups to require franchisees to provide data on the broadband transmission technologies they use and throughput speeds. However, under the proposed rules, it would require franchisees to provide data on the extent it is utilizing wireless broadband technology.

"The State and the Commission have a strong interest in making sure that unserved or underserved areas gain access to broadband services," the proposed decision states. "We believe areas currently unserved or underserved by broadband at this point will likely
be rural areas, or other areas that are high cost due to distance, terrain, demographics and density issues. It is thus important that the Commission gather data that will help us understand the extent to which wireless broadband is reaching these difficult-to-serve areas, and the degree to which consumers view these services as a means to satisfy their on-line needs. Accordingly, we will require subscriber data relating to wireless broadband to indicate whether the subscription is for a data-enabled wireless phone, PDA or other wireless hand-held device, or whether the subscription is for the use of a wireless data card. Wireless data cards are capable of providing either mobile or fixed broadband access to the internet from a customer’s personal computer, and may effectively substitute for wireline broadband access. Data about the adoption by customers of wireless broadband access for use with their personal computers will help guide our policies aimed at increasing investment in broadband infrastructure and closing the digital divide in our State."

White Spaces Coalition poised to move ahead with wireless broadband -- with or without FCC OK

The White Spaces Coalition, which seemed to be gearing up to take the Federal Communications Commission to court after the FCC recently panned prototype devices developed by the coalition to broadcast broadband signals in the "white spaces" between digital TV frequencies, appears to be shifting the burden back to the FCC.

There had been reports that the coalition, which is comprised of Microsoft, Google, Dell, HP, Intel, Earthlink and Phillips, had been mulling suing the FCC because it wasn't allowed to replace what it claims was a malfunctioning prototype that didn't assure government testers it wouldn't interfere with TV broadcasts.

Now it appears the coalition is preparing to move forward with or without FCC approval, according to this Broadcasting & Cable article. In short it looks like the coalition is telling the FCC if it has a problem with the devices, then the ball rests in its court to intervene.

Some commentators believe the coalition can't get a fair testing of its prototypes by the FCC because they say it's reluctant to approve a so-called "disruptive technology" that could threaten the existing duopoly of the telcos and cable companies and bring broadband where they aren't willing to go.

Well too bad. The telco/cable duopoly can no longer have it both ways, wanting to maintain territorial hegemony while at the same time leaving much of the U.S. mired in broadband black holes. The nation badly needs a "third pipe" to rapidly bring broadband to those who lack access.

Cable company in regulatory no man's land, SoCal city charges in lawsuit

This type of situation may begin to crop up frequently in California, where cable companies can opt to remain under local government franchise agreements or get a statewide franchise from the California Public Utilities Commission under new legislation that took effect this year, the Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act.

According to the San Diego Union-Tribune, the city of Carlsbad believes Time Warner is operating outside the law because it doesn't have a franchise from the city nor has it received a statewide franchise. Nor has it even applied for one according to the CPUC's Web site.

Holding up a city franchise with Time Warner is Carlsbad's insistence on higher fees to fund broadcasts of city council and other government events.

It's probable there will be other such lawsuits brought by local governments over this and, more likely, when negotiations stall over buildout requirements in which the locals insist cable companies serve their entire communities instead of leaving parts in the dark on the wrong side of the digital divide. The likely targets include telcos and other cable players -- like Comcast for example -- that have so far not applied for or received statewide franchises.