Federal regulators are considering whether the government should take greater control of the Internet and ask consumers to pay higher phone charges in order to provide all Americans with cheaper access to broadband Internet service.

The Federal Communications Commission Wednesday will lay out the case for expanding broadband Internet service, outlining current obstacles to making it widely available. The agency is considering whether to force Internet providers to share their networks with rivals and raise fees charged on consumer phone bills to pay for the broader access.

The proposals, which have sparked criticism from telecommunications and cable companies, represent a reversal from the Bush Administration, when regulators cut back on government control of Internet and telephone service.

The new commission, controlled by Democrats, is considering whether more government control is needed to ensure competition and more affordable Internet service.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Verizon Communications Inc. (VZ) Chairman Ivan Seidenberg on Wednesday had some harsh words for the Federal Communications Commission a day ahead of its planned vote on open Internet rules, adding to what has become a fever pitch of public debate over the proposal.

The speech was delivered on the same day that 30 business investors in technology companies sent a letter to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski praising the rules.

In a speech before the SUPERCOMM 2009 conference in Chicago, Mr. Seidenberg said it would be a “mistake, pure and simple” for the FCC to impose a “burdensome regime” of regulation on the Internet, particularly if the rules apply only to Internet service providers like Verizon and not Web companies like Google Inc. (GOOG).

Read the rest of this post on the original site

In the long fight over open Internet, or net neutrality, rules on Internet providers, we’re still essentially in pre-game.

You’d never know it from the flurry of lobbying across the country last week.

On Friday, it was House Democrats’ turn, when 72 members sent a letter to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski, asking him to soften a net-neutrality proposal the agency is expected to approve next week.

The lawmakers urged the FCC to “carefully consider the full range of potential consequences that government action may have on network investment,” while crafting the proposed rules. Phone and cable companies have been making similar points to the FCC, arguing the agency should avoid rules that will hobble their ability to manage their networks and stifle investment.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

If consumer advocates get their way, deconstructing that monthly cellphone bill could become a lot easier.

Comments are filing in to the Federal Communications Commission’s request for input on simplifying wireless bills.

The deadline comes amid a thicket of consumer-focused fee news, from credit cards to overdraft fees. Consumer advocates are arguing for more transparency in billing, both when shopping around for plans and for existing mobile subscribers.

Filing comment Tuesday is BillShrink.com, a site that analyzes the fine print of credit card bills and user profiles to find the cheapest cellphone plan. The average consumer overspends $300 a month on her cellphone plan a year, Schwark Satyavolu, BillShrink’s co-founder and president, said. In the last five months, the site has found $800 million in potential savings on cellphone plans.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Internet-service providers may be worried about the Federal Communications Commission’s net-neutrality guidelines, but the analysts who cover them?

Not so much. In recent days, more than one has referred to the proposed rules as “a solution in search of a problem.”

The FCC supports net neutrality and wants to ensure that broadband providers don’t block access to certain sites or impede competitors’ services while prioritizing their own. Julius Genachowski, the agency’s chairman, announced its net-neutrality principles Monday, and cable and wireless carriers, as well as some lawmakers, were quick to signal their discomfort.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Google Inc.’s (GOOG) new phone management service is destined to draw scrutiny from the Federal Communications Commission as the agency struggles to reconcile rotary-phone-era rules for iPhones and BlackBerrys, government and industry officials said.

Google is letting consumers test its Google Voice service, which allows people to link all of their phones to a common number and manage calls and messages through a single Web site. The service can also be used to send and receive phone calls and text messages.

The FCC’s first look at Google Voice came earlier this year, when the agency began probing into why Apple Inc. (AAPL) rejected the application for its iPhone.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Senior House Democrats told the Federal Communications Commission Thursday it should do more to stop Internet providers from playing favorites among content providers, brushing aside opposition from Republicans and some large telecom firms.

Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., who chairs the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said at a hearing Thursday that he will put his weight behind a “net neutrality” bill introduced by Reps. Edward Markey, D-Mass, and Anna Eshoo, D-Calif. The bill would prevent Internet service providers from blocking or prioritizing legal content on the Web.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Earlier this month, Apple (AAPL) rejected an application for the iPhone called Google Voice. The uproar set off a chain of events—Google’s (GOOG) CEO Eric Schmidt resigning from Apple’s board, and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) investigating wireless open access and handset exclusivity—that may finally end the 135-year-old Alexander Graham Bell era. It’s about time.

With Google Voice, you have one Google phone number that callers use to reach you, and you pick up whichever phone—office, home or cellular—rings. You can screen calls, listen in before answering, record calls, read transcripts of your voicemails, and do free conference calls. Domestic calls and texting are free, and international calls to Europe are two cents a minute. In other words, a unified voice system, something a real phone company should have offered years ago.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Late last week, a day before the Federal Communications Commission started to investigate the Google (GOOG) Voice App fiasco, I spoke with the new FCC chairman, Julius Genachowski. He managed to carve out a few minutes from what has been a very busy first month on the job.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Interim Federal Communications Commission Chair Michael Copps was clearly feeling his oats on Tuesday at the government’s “kickoff” of its national broadband campaign. “The years of broadband drift and growing digital divides are coming to an end,” Copps told the gathering at the Department of Commerce’s main auditorium.

“Too few consumers and small businesses in this country have the high-speed broadband they need if they’re going to succeed,” he added, and so “today we say: ‘Enough.’ We mobilize and we begin to build.” Also attending this digital pep rally was Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and a small platoon of reps from the National Telecommunications and Information Administration.

Read the rest of this post

Ars Technica reports: The news that President Obama has formally nominated Julius Genachowski to chair the Federal Communications Commission has been received with something slightly short of euphoria by a large portion of the broadcasting/telecommunications sector. Over the last eight hours Ars Technica has been deluged with statements of pure, unadulterated happiness about the pick (which everybody has known about for months). And they’re coming from all policy directions, too.

“Julius is an outstanding choice for FCC Chairman,” Gigi Sohn of Public Knowledge says. “Julius Genachowski is an excellent choice to chair the FCC,” Comcast’s Chairman and CEO Brian L. Roberts told us. “Julius Genachowski is an excellent choice to lead the FCC,” declared Free Press’s Josh Silver shortly after the announcement.

Read the rest of this post

A showdown over the billions of dollars traded in the dark underside of the telephone system was postponed on Monday. Kevin Martin, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, had proposed a complex plan to restructure how long distance carriers pay local phone companies to complete calls. Facing opposition from the other four commissioners, Mr. Martin abandoned a vote on the plan scheduled for Tuesday.

Read the rest of this post

As a vote on the question looms, the Federal Communications Commission’s docket continues to fill up with an amazing number of statements, position papers, petitions, and pronouncements, all focused on whether the agency should authorize unlicensed devices to pick up and receive wireless broadband via temporarily unused TV channels—aka white space. Mobilization on this question has doubtless been spurred by the FCC’s impending election day vote on this issue and the increasingly vitriolic tone of the debate. Now, a small battalion of renowned performers have weighed in on the matter.

Read the rest of this post

Comcast came clean with the Federal Communications Commission late Friday, detailing how it throttled and targeted peer-to-peer traffic–maneuvers it has repeatedly denied.

The cable concern said it indeed hit “particular protocols that were generating disproportionate amounts of traffic.” The peer-to-peer protocols, Comcast said, include Ares, BitTorrent, eDonkey, FastTrack and Gnutella–vehicles used to transport copyrighted material without the owners’ permission.

On Aug. 1, when the FCC ordered it to abandon its throttling practices, Comcast denied that it was blocking any services, including “peer-to-peer services” like BitTorrent, or engaged in any blocking of services.

Read the rest of this post

The Internet was in crisis. Its electronic “pipes” were clogged with new bandwidth-hogging software. Engineers faced a choice: Allow the Net to succumb to fatal gridlock or find a solution. The year was 1987. About 35,000 people, mainly academics and some government employees, used the Internet.

Read the rest of this post