« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Tech at Night: Free Press, FCC, Google, LTE, RIM, Amazon, California

Tech at Night

Tonight, we start with a longer note that requires some setup, so bear with me as I break from the usual format for a moment.

–––

The FCC’s attempt to reclassify broadband as if it were a telephone service had already encountered opposition from a strong, bipartisan majority of Congress – not to mention usually Democratic allies like the AFL-CIO, CWA, IBEW, LULAC, MMTC, NAACP, Urban League and Sierra Club.

It is increasingly becoming a question of whether the FCC really wants to pick a Title II fight in the Courts, another with Democratic coalition members and yet another with Congress. That kind of path has the potential to be lose-lose-lose for the FCC and for Democrats.

But another story that emerged last week may be the most interesting fight of all.

Last week, Ben Chandler (D-KY) and Alan Grayson (D-FL) announced their opposition to the FCC’s Title II reclassification. Grayson’s opposition is interesting. Consider…

One of two things is happening here. Either this is a signal that the progressives have finally realized they went too far and alienated a lot of their coalition that realizes how radical their net neutrality regulation is. Or the progressives don’t realize this and, as Seton pondered at Big Government, Matt Stoller is now trying to decide whether he wants to be physically removed from Grayson’s office, too.

Either way is good for America.

–––

Oh, and just another reminder: despite what Free Press does say in its neo-Marxists missives, we truly don’t need Net Neutrality regulation. LTE is coming nearer to Verizon customers and combined with WiMAX from Sprint and others, the two technologies from a number of wireless providers will provide tremendous competition in the world of high-speed Internet access, and give unprecedented freedom for Internet users from the world of highly regulated wired Internet access. Adding the same stifling regulation to the new technologies can only hinder that.

Especially regulation from an FCC that has a loose grasp on the concept of ethics. Daily Caller reports on Kevin Werbach who works by day for a group called Supernova, funded by industry groups, and moonlights as an advisor to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski. Werbach’s efforts are funded in part by the firms the FCC regulates or plans to regulate. He claims that because he gets money from both sides of certain issues, such as Net Neutrality, that there’s no problem. Yeah, he would think that.

Of course, there are regulators other than the FCC that are problematic as well. In California, the the Fair Political Practices Commission may be gunning for the Internet and attempt to regulate sites such as Facebook and Twitter. Free speech just threatens those with power.

So does privacy, which is why per a Forbes Magazine report I was emailed and thus have no link for, Indonesia is joining the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia in attempting to shut down the use of RIM‘s encrypted Blackberry services, because RIM will not play favorites and give select governments special treatment. Privacy aids free speech, and the two are a threat to anyone who seeks to gather and maintain power over people.

The State Department has expressed “disappointment” about the Blackberry announcements (which the UAE in turn called disappointing), which surprises me as RIM is a Canadian firm, plus it’s not as though the US hasn’t passed laws requiring firms to aid in government wiretaps of telecommunications. That law is called the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act. Is the administration disappointed with the US, too? If so, what action is being taken to rectify that? Nothing, of course. It’s all talk.

The Justice Department is pretty worthless, too, claiming that the Americans with Disabilities Act prohibits colleges from shifting to digital textbooks from their paper equivalents. They claim that the requirement to use Amazon‘s Kindle hurts the blind… except that the blind can’t read a non-braille textbook anyway. Your taxes at work, folks. I couldn’t make this up.

And to cap off the night, here’s something to think about on a dark, quiet night: data gathering and database searching firm Google is developing a relationship with the CIA. Chew on that.

COMMENTS

  • http://www.redstate.com/etcartman Kenny Solomon

    Honest……. It was in the mail as a text-over-hyperlink.

    Really.

    —————

    http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2010/08/04/technology-mobile-telecommunications-blackberry-crackdown_7825869.html

    JAKARTA, Indonesia — Indonesia said Wednesday it is considering following the lead of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in banning BlackBerry services, adding to pressure on device maker Research in Motion Ltd. to give governments greater access to data.

    Gatot Dewabroto, spokesman for the Ministry of Communication and Information, wants RIM ( RIMM – news – people ) to set up a server locally so encrypted information sent by the phones will not have to be routed through the Canadian company’s overseas computers.

    —————-

    It’s an AP report…… Many news outlets have picked it up.

    Cheers !

  • Joliphant

    Of the demographic I interact with its not even a blip from a stealth fighter on the radar. Its also something that seems if you go to the trouble to explain it to the people, it takes a significant amount of time and even then they don’t get it. I’d wager its pretty easy for politicians to switch sides on the issue because most people never knew what their side was in the first place.

    It does have a very passionate constituency on both sides though (myself included in that group) just not a very big one. It also tends to take a backseat to other issues as well. It wont pop a democrat up to the point where I will vote for him, because Abortion, Taxation, etc all overwhelm it.

  • trutexan

    is like buying a PC… As soon as you get it home, the technology is outdated and in 6 months, nearly extinct.

    As far as understanding it all, I try to keep up with it (as a geek myself) and sometimes even I’m baffeled. And if I can’t explain it, there’s no way the folks around the water cooler will get it. Drudge is running a headline in WaPo about Google & Verizon partnering up. Why? The internet works fine. Other than the ultimate goal of squelching free speech, I don’t see how net neutrality benefits these companies in any way. But then when Genachowski gets in the mix, something inside feels creepy.

  • http://www.redstate.com/etcartman Kenny Solomon

    Report from CNBC:

    Google Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. are close to finalizing a proposal for so-called “network neutrality” rules, which would dictate how broadband providers treat Internet traffic flowing over their lines, according to a person briefed on the negotiations.

    In a statement Wednesday, Verizon said it has been in talks with Google for nearly 10 months to try to strike some sort of compromise on net neutrality. It added that it remains committed to the discussions taking place at the FCC and is “optimistic this process will reach a consensus that can maintain an open Internet and the investment and innovation required to sustain it.”

    Google had no comment.

    ===============

    Google’s acting as if they’re the government.

    Oh…… Right…….. Eric Schmidt and others from Google are in the government.

    How silly of me to forget that total coincidence.

    Hmmmmmmm…… New addition to the ICLEI/one-world-government terminology….. Now to go along with Sustainable Development, we have ‘Sustainable Investment’,

    I’m wondering if there’s such a thing as Sustainable Ammu……….. oops, can’t go there.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    The problem with Free Press Net Neutrality *is* the massive power grab and unrealistic state control.

    If Google and Verizon do something privately, who gives a rip?

    That’s life in the free market.

  • The_Gadfly

    agreement this morning on The Register and from what I read there, what Verizon and Google might agree to is not Net Neutrality in the same sense that Free Press means it. According to the notes there, Verizon and Google are only agreeing to treat one kind of traffic the same regardless of point of origin. Part of the heart of the Free Press argument is that VOIP, texting, and bit torrent traffic should all be prioritized in the same manner. Personally I would prefer an internet along what is being proposed: all VOIP packets get prioritized the same at the switches, but VOIP is prioritized over text, which is prioritized over torrents. It’s the government power grab to which I object. And frankly, I can see the value in people who pay more having a somewhat higher priority than those who pay less so long as I can do what I want to with my service. I trust the free market to provide enough of a mix of both types of service so both types of users can be supported.

    That article made another interesting note: to some extent Google no longer needs Net Neutrality the way they did when this whole argument started. They have already purchased private lines for interlinking their nodes to the primary access points and can transmit data across those nodes as they please.