Constructive ideas (mostly) offered for Californian broadband subsidy plan

14 June 2014 by Steve Blum
, , , , ,

Except for a couple of not so veiled threats of legal action, the comments submitted to the California Public Utilities Commission regarding a new plan to re-start the California Advanced Services Fund (CASF) program were generally positive, with few specific recommendations for changes. The nastiness came from the cable industry’s lobbyists in Sacramento – the California Cable and Telecommunications Association – and Verizon (more on that tomorrow).

Comments from other incumbent telephone companies – with the glaring exception of AT&T, which didn’t submit any – were more nuanced.… More

California cable lobby to CPUC: we're in charge, not you

12 June 2014 by Steve Blum
, , , ,

Lobbyists for the California cable industry want to rewrite broadband subsidy rules to give cable companies the right to say yea or nay to proposed infrastructure upgrade projects, instead of the California Public Utilities Commission.

That’s the gist of comments filed yesterday by the California Cable & Telecommunications Association, (CCTA) regarding new rules for the CASF broadband infrastructure subsidy program

In order for the Commission to provide for a true right of first refusal specific to a project, the rules would necessarily provide the opportunity to the existing provider to demonstrate that it will, within a reasonable timeframe, upgrade existing service for a project area for which a grant has been sought.

More

Good intentions shouldn't be good enough to preempt Californian broadband projects

11 June 2014 by Steve Blum
, , , ,

Yeah. Right.

A proposal to start taking applications again for broadband infrastructure subsidies from the California Advanced Services Fund (CASF) is generating a healthy debate. Today was the deadline to submit opening comments to the California Public Utilities Commission on new draft rules and a schedule for CASF grant and loan applicants. The responses are still coming in, but so far the CPUC’s office of ratepayer advocates and one telephone company, Frontier, have submitted comments – more on them later – as have several regional broadband consortia.… More

Broadband astroturf grows thicker

10 June 2014 by Steve Blum
, , , , , , ,

The astroturfing season is officially open. According to a story in Vice, big incumbent ISPs are trying to make their opposition to new FCC network neutrality rules or, worse, reclassification of broadband as a regulated, common carrier service look like it’s coming from the common people. A group calling itself Broadband for America – who could be against that? – is cranking up an artificial grassroots – astroturf – campaign against net neutrality. But the group’s leadership is not exactly made up of consumer advocates…

Last month, Broadband for America wrote a letter to the FCC bluntly demanding that the agency ‘categorically reject’ any effort toward designating broadband as a public utility.

More

AT&T's rural broadband solution makes satellite look cheap

9 June 2014 by Steve Blum
, , , ,

Something for everyone off the turnip truck.

As it shuts off new rural DSL connections, AT&T is talking up the wonders of its wireless service. It’s only going to get better if regulators allow it to take over DirecTv, at least according a statement the company filed with the SEC…

Today, many Americans in rural areas lack access to a high speed broadband service or have access to only one provider. With the cost synergies and increased revenue from this transaction, AT&T will expand its high speed broadband build to offer a competitive bundle of high speed fixed wireless broadband and satellite video service.

More

U.S. supreme court sticks to the strict meaning of patent infringement

There’s good news in the U.S. supreme court’s unanimous decision this week to toss out a patent infringement lawsuit brought by Akamai against a competing content delivery network, Limelight.

The court declined to open a vast new frontier for patent troll claims. Akamai, of course, isn’t a troll – it uses its patented technology to good effect – but it was trying to make the case that a partial (and thus, under law, allowable) duplication of a method it developed was actually an infringement because Limelight told customers how to complete the missing steps themselves.… More

On the whole, it's broadband market failure


What’s a snowball’s chance in Washington?

Telecoms mega-deals (or have we upgraded to giga-deals?) are snowballing: four in four months. First Comcast and Time-Warner, then Comcast and Charter, AT&T and DirecTv and now Sprint and T-Mobile. Each new merger – of companies or markets – looks to the previous ones for justification. If Comcast is bulking up, AT&T needs to as well. A bigger AT&T, in turn, requires that Sprint and T-Mobile combine forces, or so they say.… More

AT&T Gigapower tease is just a Gigaweasel

5 June 2014 by Steve Blum
, , , ,

AT&T is promising more fiber (and, by the way, higher rural wireless broadband speeds) if it’s allowed to buy DirecTv. That’s one way of reading a disclosure statement it just submitted to the SEC, but it’s not the way to bet.

What the filing actually says is…

The economics of this transaction will allow the combined company to upgrade 2 million additional locations to high speed broadband with Gigapower FTTP (fiber to the premise) and expand our high speed broadband footprint to an additional 13 million locations where AT&T will be able to offer a pay TV and high speed broadband bundle.

More

Rumored FCC upload standard not designed for transparency


Might be substandard, but impossible to tell for sure. Click for bigger version.

The FCC’s definition of adequate broadband service as 4 Mbps down and 1 Mbps up has long been outdated. The California Public Utilities Commission has been working with a minimum of 6 Mbps down and 1.5 Mbps up since 2012, when it adopted it as the threshold for determining which areas would and would not be eligible for broadband construction money from the California Advanced Services Fund.… More

Nimby laws will keep Google Fiber out of its own backyard

3 June 2014 by Steve Blum
, , , , , ,

All Google has accomplished so far by including 5 Silicon Valley cities on its list of 34 candidates for fiber build-outs is to prove that California is a land of opportunity for obstructionists and not for broadband. To build on its home turf, Google Fiber has to accept that state and local laws allow anyone with an objection – no matter how trivial – to snarl and delay construction for months or even years.

The clearest warning comes in Palo Alto’s response to the Google Fiber City Checklist.… More