FCC: Foolish or just incompetent?
- Share/Email
- Tweet This
- Print
Some days, when you look at the FCC all you can do is say ay yi yi … and reach for the tequila. We’ve already discussed the
raging incompetence of Our Lads (and Lass) in Washington, D.C., when it comes to screwing up universal access. Now we can
add ham-handed cronyism and jaw-dropping inconsistency to the list of boneheaded maneuvers.
Last week, start-up Frontline Wireless dropped out of the upcoming 700MHz wireless auction, scheduled to begin Jan. 24. The significance? Frontline had been expected to proffer the winning bid for what was,
in effect, an FCC-sponsored “spectrum set-aside”. Frontline’s backers included former FCC chair Reed Hundt (hmm, can you spell
“back-scratching?”).
At Frontline’s request (don’t even ask) the FCC carved out 10MHz of spectrum for public safety usage. Frontline’s plan was
to piece the spectrum together to provide a national wireless broadband network for use by emergency workers.
Frontline now says it can’t afford to build the network. The FCC is scrambling to line up alternative bids (no success so
far). One possible outcome is that 10MHz of valuable spectrum goes unused, because the way the spectrum was portioned makes
it essentially useless. At this rate, I wouldn’t trust the FCC to carve a turkey, let alone portion out spectrum. But I’m
not done yet.
Moving right along, check out the FCC’s illogical policy on net neutrality: Good for cable companies, bad for telcos. On Jan.
14, the FCC grandly announced it’s going after (cable company) Comcast for mucking around in customer traffic. Specifically,
it’s launched an investigation into the documented complaint that Comcast has been interfering with customers attempting to
use the BitTorrent peer-to-peer file-sharing protocol.
So far so good — Comcast has way overstepped the line, and ought to be spanked. Hard. Yay to the FCC for (belatedly) recognizing
this.
But get this: On the same day, AT&T announced it was planning to filter network content to preclude possible copyright violations. The response from the FCC?
Nada.
Here's the deal: I’ve made the point many times that the pro-net-neutrality crowd needs to recognize service providers’ legitimate
need to offer tiered classes of service. But messing with customer content — whether copyrighted or otherwise— is going too
far.
Partner Content
Simplify Your Branch Infrastructure
Learn how to simplify your branch infrastructure while dramatically increasing app performance with Citrix Branch Repeater.
Download the Free Info Kit
Next-Gen Load Balancing
Free Guide: "Next Gen Load Balancing: 8 Things You Need to Handle Today's Network Traffic" shows you the functionality needed in your next load balancer.
Download the Free Guide
Accelerate Your Web Apps by up to 5x
Free Guide: "The Secret to Getting Maximum Speed from your Web Applications."' Learn how you can deliver Web apps up to 5x faster.
Download the Free Guide
Comments (4)
RE: FCC: Foolish or just incompetent?By Scott Cleland on January 17, 2008, 3:41 pmTwo comments if I may. I am Scott Cleland Chairman of Netcompetition.org which represents broadband interests on net neutrality. There is a flaw in your logic...
Reply | Read entire comment
Big Brother is watching?By Anonymous on January 22, 2008, 9:06 pmOK, so am I supposed to read anything into this...after clicking on hundreds of Network World articles over the years and never having a problem, the article flaming...
Reply | Read entire comment
Thanks for your commentBy Johna Till Johnson on January 23, 2008, 12:27 pmDear Mr. Cheney, Please seek the full text of this article in the man-sized safe in your office. Unless it's too crowded in there :-) Seriously, thanks for...
Reply | Read entire comment
Filter or not?By Johna Till Johnson on January 23, 2008, 12:36 pmHi Scott, You're too kind. (Seriously). The flaw is not in my argument, it's in the facts--and you raise a valid point, which I plan to address in future columns....
Reply | Read entire comment
View all comments