saschameinrath.com

My good friend, Marvin Ammori, is hosting the University of Nebraska Space & Telecom Law Program's Telecom and Space Conference in DC tomorrow. It's an all-star lineup and certain to contain a good amount of interesting debate. I'll be there for an afternoon panel and look forward to the day's discussions.

“Looking Back at the Past Eight Years, Looking Toward the Next Four”

November 13, 2008
Washington Court Hotel
525 New Jersey Avenue
Washington, D.C.

8:45 a.m. Welcome (Matt Schaefer, Director, UNL Space & Telecom Law Program)

8:50 a.m. Opening Remarks FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein

9:00 a.m. Morning Keynote Discussion
* Richard Wiley, Partner, Wiley Rein, former Chairman, FCC
* Ben Scott, Policy Director, Free Press
* Cecilia Kang, Washington Post (moderator)

10:00-11:00 a.m. Wireless Issues
* Fred Campbell, President, Wireless Communications Association & former Wireless Bureau Chief, FCC
* William Webb, Head, Ofcom Research & Development (U.K.)
* Terri Natoli, Vice-President, Regulatory Affairs, Clearwire
* Robert Pepper, Cisco (invited)

11:20 a.m. - 12:20 p.m. Network Neutrality
* Marvin Ammori, Professor of Law, U. of Nebraska College of Law & former General Counsel, Free Press (moderator)
* Frannie Wellings, Telecom Counsel, US Sen. Byron Dorgan
* Rebecca Arbogast, Principal, Stifel Nicolaus,
* Markham Erickson, Executive Director, Open Internet Coalition
* James Cicconi, Senior Executive Vice President-External and Legislative Affairs, AT&T

12:30 p.m. Lunch

2:00-3:00 p.m. International Issues
* Tricia Paoletta, Harris, Wiltshire, & Grannis
* Ambassador Richard Russell, US Ambassador to ITU WRC-07
* Helen Domenici, International Bureau Chief, FCC
* Jonathan McHale, USTR

3:20-4:20 p.m. Broadband Policy/Universal Access
* Sascha Meinrath, Research Director, Wireless Future Program at the New America Foundation (moderator)
* Derek Turner, Research Director, Free Press
* Christopher Libertelli, Director of Government and Regulatory Affairs, Skype
* Link Hoewing, Vice President – Public Policy Development and Corporate Responsibility, Verizon
* Scott Reiter, Director of Industry Affairs, National Telecommunications Cooperative Association—The Voice of Rural Telecommunications

New America Foundation is hosting a Q&A with Eric Schmidt in DC on November 18, 2008 at 1pm. Thought some of my readers might be interested in attending (and hopefully asking some good questions). If you're not in town, it will also be webcast live. More info and RSVP at: http://www.newamerica.net/events/2008/eric_schmidt

Here's the brief blurb:

Eric Schmidt -- Chairman and CEO of Google, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the New America Foundation, and a member of President-Elect Barack Obama's Transition Economic Advisory Board -- will be in Washington Tuesday, Nov. 18, to discuss the intersection between technology and the economy.

Schmidt will explore the ways in which technology can help the new administration and Congress address two of the biggest challenges ahead: generating the kind of short- and long-term economic and job growth that can help pull the nation out of financial distress, and restoring public trust in government. He will offer specifics on such topics as the need to build a 21st Century Infrastructure, support for research and innovation, repairs for our education system, and ways to make the government more open and responsive.

Schmidt's remarks will be followed by a Q&A session. Space is limited for this event; please RSVP if you plan to attend. This event will also be webcast live.

Start: 11/18/2008 - 1:00pm
End: 11/18/2008 - 2:30pm
Ronald Reagan Building Amphitheater
1300 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, 20004
United States

Yesterday's FCC decision to open up unused TV channels to unlicensed wireless devices has generated a frenzy of activity among tech-savvy reporters. Wired interviewed me for their article today -- which hits the nail on the head, but doesn't yet focus attention on the fundamental technological shift that opportunistic spectrum access makes possible. I was hoping that Wired would be a good venue for a big picture visioning of a future where these technologies are normative -- here's what we ended up with...

[Originally posted at: http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/11/fccs-decision-t.html]

The Federal Communications Commission's decision to open up the 'white spaces' spectrum to unlicensed devices could usher in a new telecom revolution, say analysts.

Like Wi-Fi, the availability of free, unregulated spectrum could create new technologies and new markets, bringing superfast wireless connectivity to the masses. Unlike Wi-Fi, it could also put pressure on wireless carriers.

"All the PR spin and FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) failed in the face of physics and the ground reality of engineering," says Sascha Meinrath, research director of the wireless future program at the New America Foundation, a non-partisan public policy think-tank.

"Opening up white spaces will lower the cost of communications by facilitating new technology, software and devices is an enormous win for public interest," he says.

AT A GLANCE:
White Spaces Winners

Intel: The company's chips could power many of the new devices on the white spaces spectrum.

Google: New services from Google could be offered on the new spectrum. Google could even end up becoming a broadband service provider, perhaps as part of a consortium.

Motorola/Philips/Dell: They are likely to create the hardware and the devices to access the broadband services on white spaces.

Consumers: More innovative products, more wireless choices, and higher wireless data speeds. Also, the use of white spaces could finally usher in the era of seamless roaming across technologies.

White Spaces Losers

Verizon/AT&T/Comcast: These companies have paid billions over the years to gain exclusive rights to the spectrum. Now they will have to fight new entrants who have no legacy costs to worry about.

Professional Audio Equipment Manufacturers: These companies, which have so far operated in the white spaces, will have to spend more to create equipment that will work in different areas of the spectrum. They will also have to spend more on testing their devices to avoid interference.

'White spaces' refers to the unused bits of spectrum between UHF television channels, which will no longer be needed when the U.S. abandons analog television broadcasting and goes all-digital in February, 2009.

But just how to use that spectrum was a hotly-contested battle that pitted technology companies against broadcasters and wireless audio equipment manufacturers.

Wireless microphones and other equipment used by broadcasters and event producers already use some of this spectrum, so those groups resisted the idea of letting unlicensed devices onto their airwaves, willy-nilly.

The FCC's latest decision means technology companies such as Google, Intel Motorola, Phillips and Dell -- which lobbied to "free the spectrum" so they could build data services on it -- will emerge as big winners.

Telecom carriers such as Verizon, AT&T, Sprint and Comcast will feel the pain and be forced to adapt to a new reality, say analysts.

Verizon and AT&T have paid billions over the last few years for exclusive of chunks of spectrum. Also, Sprint and Clearwire are creating a Wi-Max network that could also be threatened by white spaces-based broadband.

White space frequencies are unlicensed, which means any company can use the spectrum. By contrast, wireless carriers have exclusive, licensed access to the frequencies that their phones use.

"White spaces could be a friend or foe of existing carriers," says Paul Gallant, an analyst with research firm wealth management firm The Stanford Group. "It might end up enabling carriers to enhance their retail offerings or it could be used in completely new ways to undercut the existing business models."

Sprint declined to comment.

White spaces have been coveted by technology companies for their potential. The spectrum will allow wireless signals to travel 2-3 times farther than Wi-Fi signals can today, including through obstacles.

Allowing for unlicensed use of white spaces means consumers will see a new generation of wireless broadband devices, said Craig Mundie, chief strategy officer for Microsoft, in a letter to members of the House of Representatives a few days ago.

It will enable low wireless broadband service in rural areas, self-forming mesh networks capable of routing traffic at speeds of 20 megabits per second and above within the mesh; and wireless distribution of content throughout the home and among devices, said Mundie.

That's exactly what consumers need today, agrees Meinrath. "All those problems of diversity on the airwaves and access to internet broadband connectivity are predicated on the artificial scarcity of airwaves," he says. "They will be alleviated."

The future of communications is in seamless roaming across not just networks but also technologies such as wireline broadband, Wi-Fi and cellular networks.

"The devices of the future will allow you to completely un-tether yourself," says Meinrath.

Already Google has applied for a patent that would allow the company to create such a device.

Chip companies such as Intel are also likely to profit from opening up of white spaces. Intel could potentially develop chips that can ride over white spaces, much like the Wi-Fi and WiMax-enabled chips it produces today.

The move could also mean that companies such as Motorola, Phillips and Dell could create new mobile devices that could become alternatives to smartphones or companions to notebooks.

For telecom service providers, it will be the beginning of a new world. Broadband connectivity over white spaces could change the telecom landscape much like Wi-Fi did a few years ago.

Existing service providers will have to evolve fast or find themselves sinking as newer players, probably a consortium led by Google, enter the market.

"The key question is, who is going to pick up the ball and run with it?" says Gallant.

Meanwhile Cablevision is building out a mobile broadband service in New York using unlicensed spectrum that's not white space, says Gallant. If Cablevision's experiment succeeds Comcast, Verizon and other service providers could end up embracing white spaces.

As for Verizon's $4.7 billion winning bid earlier this year for the 700
MHZ spectrum, it won't be an investment they are likely to regret.

"Verizon knew exactly what they were getting with that spectrum," says Gallant. "White spaces is just the opposite. It is very risky and may be hard to create a business model that will be truly successful on it."

Yesterday will go down in history as a bellwether moment. Few among us will soon forget the excitement of Obama's election. But there was an equally historic vote yesterday that for geeks, policy analysts, and technologists represents an entirely new trajectory in telecommunications. In essence, the FCC has begun the transition from command-and-control, single-user spectrum licensure to a more distributed system that holds the potential to eliminate the artificial scarcity that prevented widespread access to the public airwaves since 1927.

Yesterday, the FCC ruled that unlicensed white space devices would be allowed to operate on unused television channels -- allowing an entirely new generation of technological innovation to begin. While the official order has not been release, here's the information that's been gleaned thus far (please note that this is tentative information and until the official Report and Order is issued by the FCC, while unlikely, is subject to change):

• Both fixed and personal portable devices will be allowed. So look for base stations on cell towers as well as next generation PDAs and multi-media devices.
• Personal portable devices will be allowed to operate at power levels up to 40mW.
• On non-adjacent channels (i.e., where you have three unoccupied TV channels in a row, this would be the middle channel), higher power levels will be allowed (up to 100mW -- though I've also heard that up to 4-5W may be possible).
• Unlicensed wireless microphones will not receive priority status except, potentially, on channels 2-4. On all other channels (through to channel 51), all devices will share secondary status to primary broadcasters (e.g., television stations and licensed microphones).
• A geolocational database will back up spectrum sensing capabilities to ensure WSDs do not operate in restricted areas. Left unclear is whether licensed wireless microphone users will be allowed to exempt their venue from WSD use and whether this would also allow for unlicensed wireless microphone users to do likewise.
• A Notice of Inquiry will be launched by the FCC to investigate higher-powered use as an additional service in areas with few digital TV stations. This would facilitate backhaul capabilities for WISPs and other service providers.

I first started working on this proceeding back in 2004. After years of work, and an ever-increasing amount of time and energy spent on this battle, I can honestly say that I'm amazed by how successful this work has proven. At the same time, much like the presidential election, this win provides only the opportunity for amazing new innovations and services and much work remains. We need to work with performing arts groups to ensure that they have access to the technologies they need to carry out their work. And we need to work with wireless ISPs and allied organizations to ensure that they have the resources they need to continue spreading connectivity to underserved communities across the country. Finally, though the foundation has been set, the most important battle is yet to come -- opening up all underutilized bands for opportunistic spectrum reuse.

I expect a multi-pronged approach to what lies ahead. I've already begun talks with WISP allies to follow up on the FCC's announced NOI. Likewise, I'm hopeful that folks I've been talking with for months within the performing arts community will see the FCC's decision as a good reason to collaborate on future joint efforts. In the interim, I am working with my colleague, Victor Pickard, on opening up debate on opportunistic spectrum reuse -- starting with government spectrum. Our revamped working paper should be out in the near future, laying out a policy agenda for what needs to be done at the down of the age of opportunistic spectrum reuse.

Here's the FCC's press release as well as Commissionerss statements:

11/4/08

FCC Adopts Rules For Unlicensed Use of Television White Spaces.
News Release: Word | Acrobat
Martin Statement: Word | Acrobat
Copps Statement: Word | Acrobat
Adelstein Statement: Word | Acrobat
Tate Statement: Word | Acrobat
McDowell Statement: Word | Acrobat

Reaction to the New York City Council's kowtowing to the National Association of Broadcasters has already begun. In my own conversations with council members and staff, they've discussed openly that the New York City Council does not actually understand the technologies they're writing resolutions about. It's a pretty sad day for the Council -- this proceeding, which began as a Notice of Inquiry in 2002 has been dragging on for over half-a-decade because of the successful delay tactics of the National Association of Broadcasters.

The New York City Council has made it abundantly clear that they would rather weigh in supporting fear-mongering rather than support the immediate development of technologies that will dramatically lower the costs of communications for the millions of residents they purport to serve. This is particularly egregious since the heart of the resolution was written by corporate lobbyists and has remained remarkably unchanged throughout the entire so-called "due diligence" work that the Council claimed they were doing.

White space technologies have been pending before the FCC for years and years and years. At a time when the United States is falling further and further behind a growing list of other countries, one need look no further than the New York City Council's call for further stagnation to understand why.

City Council tries to halt new technology that could close the digital divide. Community advocates react.

For Immediate Release

Contact:

Kristofer Ríos (212-334-7433)

October 23, 2008

New York – Advocates for closing the digital divide condemned a City Council resolution urging the Federal Communications Commission to delay a decision concerning the unused part of the airwaves known as "white spaces." The FCC has announced its intention to issue a ruling at a November 4 meeting.

The Council's Committee on Technology in Government passed Resolution No. 1613 at a special meeting this morning. The full Council is expected to approve it this afternoon.

In passing the resolution, the Council rejected calls from technologists, good government groups, immigrant rights organizations, and community media to endorse the new technology. Instead, the resolution repeats the request from the National Association of Broadcasters that the FCC delay its decision. Because of anticipated turnover at the FCC with a new administration, any delay at this point would extend an already-four-year-long review for up to a year or more.

"The City Council is playing politics with our technological future. They would rather cut and paste a NAB press release than close the digital divide," Joshua Breitbart, Policy Director for People's Production House, said.

Proponents of white space technology argue that it would pave the way for cheaper, faster wireless connections to the Internet, allowing many people to afford an Internet connection for the first time. A recent study commissioned by the City's Economic Development Corporation found that only 46.4 percent of New York households have high speed Internet access, well below the national average. Low income residents are even further behind, with barely a quarter having broadband at home. Wireless access over the white spaces would be especially helpful in rural areas, where many people lack even the option of purchasing a broadband connection.

Opponents claim the devices could interfere with other wireless signals, such as television broadcasts or wireless microphone transmissions. FCC engineers recently determined that white space devices can detect and avoid other signals, which will prevent interference.

The FCC's Office of Engineering and Technology conducted 18 months of lab and field testing of white spaces prototypes, including a test at a Broadway show where wireless microphones are routinely used. Broadway producers, while not technically licensed to use wireless microphones, have relied on them for years and fear having to adjust their practices. On October 15, the FCC's engineers concluded that "the burden of 'proof of concept' has been met."

The engineering results are part of an FCC review dating back to early 2004. All told, the various stakeholders have filed nearly 30,000 comments in the proceeding. Maximum Service Television and wireless microphone manufacturer Shure, both of which testified before City Council in support of the resolution, have filed 104 and 67 comments with the FCC respectively.

"We're hopeful that the FCC will ignore the New York City Council's sop to the broadcasters and base its decision on sound engineering and the public interest," Breitbart said.

***

People's Production House is a national media justice organization based in New York City. It provides young people, immigrants, and low-wage workers with a comprehensive education for the information age, combining media production, media literacy and media policy.

I'm here in sunny California for the "Pervasive Connectivity: Open Airwaves, Open Networks" event that the New America Foundation is hosting at the Googleplex. We have a packed room and are just getting warmed up. I expect lots of useful knowledge from the luminaries we have speaking here today -- here's the agenda:

Agenda

9:30 am - Registration

10:00 am - Welcome

10:15 am - Open Airwaves: Technologies & Policies for Opportunistic Spectrum Sharing

• Michael Calabrese
  Director, Wireless Future Program, New America Foundation
• Paul Kolodzy
  Kolodzy Consulting, Former Chair, FCC Spectrum Policy Task Force
• Mark McHenry
  CEO and Founder, Shared Spectrum Co.

11:00 am - Open Networks: Technologies & Policies for Consumer Choice and Innovation

• Tim Wu
  Professor, Columbia Law School & Chairman, Free Press
• Larry Alder
  Google
• Sascha Meinrath
  Research Director, Wireless Future Program, New America Foundation

11:45 am - Community Networking: Digital Inclusion, Unwired

• Rey Ramsey
  CEO & Co-Founder, One Economy Corp
• Mark Ansboury
  SVP & Chief Technology Officer, OneCommunity
• Sascha Meinrath
  Research Director, Wireless Future Program, New America Foundation

12:30 pm - Closing Remarks: Implications for 2009 Policy Agenda

12:45 pm - Lunch & Tech Demo in No Name Café

[UPDATE01]: Below are copies of the two presentations I gave today.

In a major win for the public interest, the Broadband Data Improvement Act passed the Senate (on September 26th) and the House (on September 29th). Due to amendments, it now goes back to the Senate for final approval (should be pro-forma) before it lands on George Bush's desk.

With the United States falling further and further behind a host of other countries, the question on many people's minds (including the folks over at Point-Topic who created this graphic) is, "Why is this happening?":

[Yes, that's the United States, chugging along ever closer to the bottom of the pack. Click here for a full-size image.]

Senator Inouye and Congressman Markey have been pushing for the passage of this bill for quite some time -- resurrecting the idea from congress to congress. The Act, with its explicit purpose "To improve the quality of Federal and State data regarding the availability and quality of broadband services and to promote the deployment of affordable broadband services to all parts of the Nation." has drawn widespread opposition from telcos who've claimed that our current data collection efforts are "good enough." Full text of the Act can be found here.

Among it's mandates, the Broadband Data Improvement Act requires that:

Demographic Information for Unserved Areas- As part of the inquiry required by subsection (b), the Commission shall compile a list of geographical areas that are not served by any provider of advanced telecommunications capability (as defined by section 706(c)(1) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. 157nt note)) and to the extent that data from the Census Bureau is available, determine, for each such unserved area
(1) the population;
(2) the population density; and
(3) the average per capita income.

For those of us studying the digital divide, these data will provide much-needed information about the nature of underserved communities. Of course, they could also paint a damning picture of systematic, institutionalized redlining of poor and rural constituencies.

The Act also calls for an in-depth international comparison of broadband service levels, speeds, and pricing. 75 communities in 25 countries, matched "to the extent possible [by] population size, population density, topography, and demographic profile...comparable to the population size, population density, topography, and demographic profile of various communities within the United States" will be assessed.

Even more importantly, the Act requires a "Consumer Survey of Broadband Service Capability" -- in other words, it requires collection of real-world information on what's happening with broadband services in the United states. According to the Act:

For the purpose of evaluating, on a statistically significant basis, the national characteristics of the use of broadband service capability, the Commission shall conduct and make public periodic surveys of consumers in urban, suburban, and rural areas in the large business, small business, and residential consumer markets to determine
(A) the types of technology used to provide the broadband service capability to which consumers subscribe;
(B) the amounts consumers pay per month for such capability;
(C) the actual data transmission speeds of such capability;
(D) the types of applications and services consumers most frequently use in conjunction with such capability;
(E) for consumers who have declined to subscribe to broadband service capability, the reasons given by such consumers for declining such capability;
(F) other sources of broadband service capability which consumers regularly use or on which they rely; and
(G) any other information the Commission deems appropriate for such purpose.

Along with requirements to investigate how best to collect a host of different metrics and a mandate for states to likewise engage in broadband data collection efforts, the Broadband Data Improvement Act represents an important step forward in addressing the broadband market failure gripping the United States. Though the Act's loopholes may yet allow for further obfuscation of critically important data, overall, this Act adds a great deal of momentum to efforts to increase digital inclusion and foster universal, affordable broadband access.

While media conglomerization continues relatively unchecked in the United States, our European allies are looking to actively support local community and alternative media. The latest resolution on the issue from the European Parliament contains some fairly strong language:

Read more...  read more »

It was just last year that those of us raising alarms about the massive half-decade market failure in the United States to adequately provision broadband services were facing a misinformation campaign that raw numbers mattered more than percentage rankings. According to this argument, the US broadband market was sound because we had more broadband lines than anyone else.

The misinformation brigade got so much attention (mainly due to incumbents funding a propaganda campaign that "everything is fine here, nothing to see"), that public interest groups had to issue reports systematically refuting the PR are marketing hype. In fact, Free Press issued a point-by-point rebuttal, "'Shooting the Messenger' Myth vs. Reality: U.S. Broadband Policy and International Broadband Rankings" -- and myth #3 was:

The OECD’s reporting is suspect because they don’t emphasize the total number of connections. If they did, they’d see that the United States is No. 1 because we have more lines than any other country in the world.

As Derek Turner, the report's author, rightfully concluded:

The United States is the largest country in the OECD, and the third-largest country in the world. Reporting the total number of connections is meaningless without context. Lines per-capita or lines per household is the proper way to conduct comparisons.

Defenders of the broadband status quo often argue that the penetration data doesn’t matter, because the United States is No. 1 in total number of connections. In his recent speech, Commissioner McDowell said, “The [OECD] study does not emphasize the fact that the United States is simply the largest broadband market in the world with over 58 million subscribers, according to the OECD report – more than twice the number of America’s closest competitor.”

This is true. But it is not a meaningful critique of the comparative performance of nations on a per capita basis. Using this logic, we could say the United States has more unemployed people than any other country in the OECD, including developing economies like Mexico, so therefore the U.S. economy must be in the tank. But when viewed through the sensible per capita lens, which accounts for country population, the United States has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the entire OECD.

The argument that relatively poor U.S. performance is excused by the total number of broadband lines irrespective of population is misleading. Looking from another angle, China now has almost as many broadband connections as the United States and will likely overtake us this year. But China has four times as many people as the United States. Our household adoption rate is nearly four-times higher than China’s. When China overtakes us in the raw number of connections, we will rightly not point to the Chinese as the world leaders in broadband performance.

And here we are, one year later, and the headline last week was, "China Overtakes U.S. In Number Of Broadband Lines." The original critique certainly holds -- raw numbers of broadband lines are not a good indicator of the health of a country's broadband market. But when free market institutes are still touting the health of the US broadband market, I can't help but wonder, how bad does a market have to fail before certain people agree that it isn't doing so well? As with the all-too-obvious comparison with the US financial market (which McCain was touting as fundamentally sound in mid-September), the US broadband market is fundamentally and dangerously problematic.

The end result? Even with a major stimulus, it will take years for the United States to achieve parity (much less pull ahead) of our global competitors. The United States is currently at a competitive disadvantage in a digital economy -- the best thing we can do is to launch a broadband bailout now. Otherwise, we'll be paying far more, and achieving far less, down the road.

Here's a quick 3.5-minute video explaining the airwaves and the current battle over White Space Devices. It was pulled together by Joshua Breitbart and the folks at People's Production House over in New York City. Currently, NYC community organizers have their hands full dealing with the upcoming NYC Council resolution against white space devices (apparently, the City Council has decided that opera for the elite is more important than broadband for the masses).

The video is a great synopsis for non-geeks and folks who are just getting their feet wet in this area. Definitely worth some attention and promotion: