June 24, 2020 — The conflict over the Federal Communications Commissions’ Ligado decision, which continues to be disputed by the Department of Defense and the Department of Transportation, has exposed a fault line in the spectrum allocation decision-making process.
“Why are the agencies behaving this way?,” Public Knowledge Senior Vice President Harold Feld asked at a Tuesday webinar hosted by Public Knowledge and the Lincoln Network. “The decision making process that has been working for two decades is being torn away by these agencies.”
Joel Thayer, telecommunications expert and attorney at Phillips Lytle LLP, said that “unfortunately, the Department of Defense is only taking their own parochial interest into account.”
In spite of the continued pushback towards the FCC’s decision, the agency did everything they could have, panelists said.
Feld argued that the Department of Defense, which has the most spectrum of any federal agency, may be concerned about losing control of crucial telecommunications resources.
“If the FCC does its job reallocating spectrum, the Department of Defense may be at a disadvantage in future fights,” Feld said.
The panelists attempted to debunk the common arguments and misinformation spread in opposition to the Ligado decision.
One such critique was that the Ligado decision was made in a hurried fashion, as the FCC announced its decision on a Sunday.
Panelists called this critique laughable, as the FCC’s decision actually took longer than expected and deliberations have been ongoing for 17 years.
“[This critique] reflects a basic unfamiliarity with how the FCC works, as the vast majority of items are voted on in circulation,” Feld said. “People arguing this are deliberately trying to mislead people.”
Other critics have claimed that the Ligado decision will slow down 5G deployment.
Daniel Hoffman, fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, discredited this argument, explaining that the fastest way to 5G deployment is through utilization of the L-band, which is what Ligado is proposing to do.
“The only hold up is this bureaucratic sinkhole that we’re in,” Hoffman said.
The final critique commonly used against the Ligado decision was that widespread harmful interference would result from the decision.
After utilizing several different tests to understand if there would be harmful interference, the FCC found that no interference was occurring.
To mitigate the concerns of other agencies, the FCC added additional safeguards to the decision to lower the risk of interference.
For example, the agency dedicated an additional 23 megahertz of space between Ligado’s part of the spectrum and the area used by neighboring agencies to create a guard band. Further, the FCC lowered the company’s base station power levels to 9.8 decibel watts.
“People are unaware of how much the FCC mandated to make the allocation safe,” Hoffman said.
“The decision-making problem that has been developing is damaging to the future of 5G and the future of wireless,” Thayer said, calling for White House intervention.
“We need to ask, what does the Department of Defense want out of this? What does Congress want out of this? And what’s good for innovation?” Feld concluded.
Broadband Labels Should Include Practical Applications of Internet Packages: MIT Researchers
The FCC’s broadband label might include the number of movies one can watch at a time with a certain plan.
WASHINGTON, September 19, 2022 – The Federal Communications Commission’s upcoming broadband transparency labels should include “interpretive” information that helps consumers understand the practical implications of their internet performance, such as the number of movies they can watch at a time, according to researchers Friday at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
As directed by Congress in the Infrastructure, Investment and Jobs Act, the FCC is currently working on a “label” service providers will be required to fulfill that features details of broadband service plans, including monthly price, typical download and upload speeds, latency, packet loss, and other relevant information. The labels, which must be finalized by November, are meant to help consumers make a more informed decision when choosing an internet plan.
Because consumers are often unaware of how aspects of network performance affect the user experience, David Clark and Sara Wedeman of MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory said Friday at the TPRC 2022 conference that simply displaying technical metrics – e.g., an average upload speed of 20 Megabits per second (Mbps) – is unlikely to facilitate better user decision making.
The pair recommends the FCC adopt and require of service providers the equivalent of a nutritional label’s daily value field: a “Satisfactory Service Label.” Just as the daily value field makes complicated nutritional information actionable for the average consumer, the SSL will clarify how the technical metrics of an internet package affect performance, Clark said.
“One can propose a somewhat simple SSL for download speed by noting that for each simultaneous HD stream, no more than…about 9 mb/s is necessary. One could probably watch 3 HD streams at once over a 25 mb/s service,” said the paper on which Clark and Wedeman’s TPRC presentation was based.
Difficulties in the labeling process
Paroma Sanyal and Divya Goel of the consulting firm Brattle Group also presented a paper on broadband labeling at TPRC. They argued that mandatory labeling will likely lead to lower prices and higher quality internet plans but also presents economic and legal risks if implemented incorrectly. Sanyal said that the standardized labeling regimes often introduce compliance costs and harm innovation, recommending instead a simple, clear system to minimize the emergence of unintended consequences.
Sanyal’s and Goel’s paper – coauthored with the Brattle Goup’s Coleman Bazelon – argues that the FCC’s current guidance doesn’t provide a specific definition of “typical” network performance, leaving much interpretation to broadband providers.
The paper also notes a multitude of technical factors outside the provider’s control that could affect performance. “For fixed broadband factors such as the vintage of equipment on the consumer premises…for mobile broadband, the vintage and type of handsets, weather, and location of the consumer are important,” the paper reads.
“As an illustration, typical speeds in a DC neighborhood may not be the typical speeds in a Baltimore neighborhood, which begs the question of how geographically targeted such labels should be, and, of course, the associated costs,” the paper adds.
FTC Forum Hears Evidence that U.S. Should Follow European Union Privacy Model
The agency is proposing to use its own authority to regulate tech platforms for their ‘commercial surveillance’.
WASHINGTON September 15, 2022 – The Federal Trade Commission should consider adopting standards established by the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation to force Big Tech platforms to consent to the use of their user’s personal information, according to the CEO of a digital content trade organization.
The FTC proposed last month to use its authority under Section 18 of the FTC Act to bring “commercial surveillance” – the act of entities collecting personal information and selling them to third-party data brokers – under its authority to further regulate technology platforms. Section 18 is a statute of the FTC Act that grants the commission the authority to implement trade regulation rules for businesses that use tactics that are considered “unfair” or harmful to consumers.
Digital Content Next CEO Jason Kint said during an FTC public hearing on the matter on September 8 that the EU’s GDPR model provides an established practice of requiring companies and organizations to get consent to the use of their data in these contexts.
“Having a pop-up come up [for consent] every time you visit the site…that’s entirely in line with users’ expectations,” Kint said. To comply with GDPR principles, websites shown to users in the United States must ask visitors if they consent to the collection of their data in part to cater certain products to them.
“The user doesn’t want it to happen where their data is being tracked by third parties,” Kint said.
“So, if you’re the party that they’re choosing to interact with for service, providing them that data is very different.”
In August, the FTC announced an rulemaking to consider commercial surveillance as a Section 18 violation of the FTC Act. It its notice seeking comment, the FTC asked questions about what companies should disclose, who would administer the disclosure agreements, and if the FTC should impose limitations on the mechanisms companies use to hide their surveillance practices.
On July 20, the Senate Commerce Committee passed comprehensive privacy legislation a restricting collection and transfer of personal data of U.S. citizens without consent.
The measure has not yet passed the House, but in responding to the August announcement, Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, D-N.J., said that it is the responsibility of Congress, not the FTC, “to pass comprehensive federal privacy legislation.”
There are currently more than 120,000 comments on this issue. The FTC is still collecting public statements on this issue until October 21.
Library and Education Technology Groups Pan FCC Proposal for New E-Rate Procurement
Responders fear that updating the E-Rate process will increase complexity for applicants.
WASHINGTON, August 26, 2022 – Responders to the Federal Communications Commission’s proposed rulemaking to force internet service providers to bid for school and library services through a new portal expressed concern that the proposal would needlessly complicate the process.
The FCC’s E-Rate program supplements schools and libraries securing affordable telecommunications and broadband services through the Universal Service Fund. Earlier this year, the FCC released a proposal that would “streamline program requirements for applicants and service providers, strengthen program integrity… and decrease the risk of fraud, waste, and abuse.”
The proposal suggests implementing a central document repository, called a bidding portal, through which internet service providers would submit bids to the program administrator, the Universal Service Administrative Company, instead of directly to applicants at a state and local level. Currently, libraries and schools announce they are seeking services and service providers apply directly to those institutions.
With the adoption of this proposal, applicants would be required to submit competitive bidding documentation that would enable applicants to compare competing bids and the USAC would establish timeframes on when applicants are able to review the bids that providers submit.
The proposal is in response to a September 2020 report by the Government Accountability Office which addressed what the GAO considers the E-Rate program’s key fraud risks. It reported that E-Rate participants could easily misrepresent self-certification statements by violating competitive-bidding rules or processes. These violations could occur without the Commission’s or USAC’s knowledge because they do not have direct access to the bidding information.
The GAO suggested that allowing the USAC direct access to obtain and monitor bidding information would improve security and strengthen program controls.
Proposal widely panned by CoSN and educational technology directors
However, response to the proposal was widely negative, with commenters raising concern that changing the process would needlessly complicate a system that, according to Verizon, is already promoting fair and open bidding on E-Rate contracts.
The Consortium for School Networking, the State Educational Technology Directors Association, and the National School Boards Association claimed that the Commission’s past reliance on state and local procurement requirements has been a success and has not led to an undue amount of fraud and abuse, negating the need to update the process.
Creating a national bidding portal could also interfere with existing state and local bidding requirements and unduly complicate the bidding process, hindering E-Rate participation, said the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors in its comment to the FCC.
“A bidding portal would interfere with existing state and local bidding and procurement processes, which would likely cause significant issues for applicants and may cause some to have to drop out of the E-Rate program,” read NATOA’s report.
The establishment of a national E-rate bidding portal would be “unnecessary, burdensome and will increase the complexity of, rather than simplify the E-rate program,” agreed South Dakota’s Department of Education in its statement.
National level or local level changes
Since the FCC’s announcement in December, the proposed changes have been subject to much debate. John Harrington, CEO of Funds for Learning, wrote in April that the E-Rate changes would be detrimental, claiming that procurement decisions are best made at the local level, rather than a “one-size-fits-all system.”
Furthermore, John Windhausen, executive director of the Schools, Health & Libraries Broadband Coalition, said in December that the proposal will burden applicants, despite the potential benefits of eliminating at least some forms of fraud. Windhausen claimed that there is not enough evidence to show that a new portal is needed.
However, the proposal has not been universally dismissed. In a comment filed last week, the United States Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, which is responsible for enforcing antitrust laws, expressed support for the proposal saying that it would “enhance the ability of the FCC’s Office of Inspector General to detect and deter fraud in the E-Rate program.”
The DOJ added that the update would allow for more robust enforcement of laws, including investigation and prosecution of antitrust and related crimes that occur during E-Rate procurements. “All responsive service providers and applicants are in a position to complete the additional step,” said the DOJ in response to critics citing undue burden.
The proposal remains in consideration at the FCC.
- Tech Against Texas Social Media, Alabama Middle Mile Grant, IP3 Awards Bestowed
- State Broadband Maps Show Significantly Fewer Served Locations than Does FCC’s Map
- As LEO Industry Grows, FCC Adopts Rule to Limit Space Debris
- Shielding Broadband Grants from Taxes, American at ITU, Google Fiber Multi-Gig Speeds
- Public–Private Partnership Model ‘Most Effective Way’ to Address Digital Divide: AT&T Rep
- In Video Session, Christopher Mitchell Digs Into Community Ownership and Open Access Networks
Signup for Broadband Breakfast
Broadband Roundup3 weeks ago
AT&T Sues T-Mobile Over Ad, Nokia Partners with Ready, LightPath Expanding
#broadbandlive4 weeks ago
Broadband Breakfast on September 21, 2022 – Broadband Mapping and Data
Broadband Roundup4 weeks ago
Promoting Affordable Connectivity Program, Google Bars Truth Social, T-Mobile Wins 2.5 GHz Auction
Rural4 weeks ago
FCC Commits Additional $800 Million From Rural Digital Opportunity Fund
Fiber4 weeks ago
Missouri City Utility to Complete Fiber Build Using Utility Lease Model
#broadbandlive4 weeks ago
Broadband Breakfast on September 14, 2022 – How Can Cities Take Advantage of Federal Broadband Funding?
#broadbandlive4 weeks ago
Broadband Breakfast on September 7, 2022 – Assessing the NTIA’s Middle Mile Grant Application Process
Funding4 weeks ago
Future of Louisiana Broadband on Stage with BEAD Planning, Workforce Training