Wireless Telecommunications

Rep Austin Scott (R-GA) brought back his End Taxpayer Funded Cell Phones Act before House lawmakers left town. That’s the legislation that GOP leadership fast-tracked straight to floor consideration immediately after its introduction in 2016. (They tried to advance it under suspension of the rules, and it went down 207-143.) It now has 18 GOP backers, triple what it had before. “My bill will reform the Lifeline Program and restore it to its original purpose of providing landline services and prohibit Universal Service support for mobile services,” Rep Scott said. A GOP leadership aide said there’s no talk on when and if the measure may be brought to the floor this time around.

Sens Cory Gardner (R-CO) and Maggie Hassan (D-NH) introduced the Advancing Innovation and Reinvigorating Widespread Access to Viable Electromagnetic Spectrum (AIRWAVES) Act, which will encourage the federal government to continue to free up spectrum for commercial licensed and unlicensed use and leverage the success of spectrum auctions to help close the urban-rural divide.

First, the legislation establishes a spectrum pipeline that will provide more capacity for wireless providers to improve existing service and expand to new areas. The AIRWAVES Act aims to motivate industry and federal agencies to find ways to better utilize spectrum and avoid a spectrum crunch and lay the groundwork for 5G technologies. Second, this legislation requires 10 percent of all of the proceeds from spectrum auctions in the bill to go directly to wireless broadband infrastructure buildout in unserved and underserved areas throughout rural communities across the country.

A bi-partisan coalition of 43 Congressional Reps is asking the Federal Communications Commission to reserve at least three TV white space channels in the 600 MHz band to support rural broadband deployments. “We believe that the television white spaces (TVWS) have strong potential to revolutionize broadband internet accessibility in rural areas,” wrote the coalition in a letter to the FCC. The coalition was led by Rep Kevin Cramer (R-ND) but also included some Democratic representatives, including Rep Anna Eshoo (D-CA).

The three channels referenced would include the duplex gap between 652-663 MHz, Channel 37 (608-614 MHz) and an additional vacant channel in the post-auction broadcast TV band (54-608 MHz), the letter stated. The channels would be reserved for unlicensed use. If the idea of reserving three channels below 700 MHz for rural broadband sounds familiar, it may be because that’s what Microsoft has asked for to support the company’s plan to spur the deployment of TV white spaces technology to unserved rural areas. The 600 MHz band initially was licensed to television broadcasters but a portion of that band will now be repurposed for wireless use. A recent auction gave broadcasters the option of voluntarily relinquishing spectrum and sharing the auction proceeds with the government.

While Verizon is telling the Federal Communications Commission to get rid of Title II classification and to weaken the open internet rules, Verizon Wireless is already trying to undermine the open internet by experimenting with potentially anti-consumer discrimination practices. Unfortunately, Verizon Wireless is proving why millions of Americans are correct in voicing their concern over the FCC’s proposal to repeal its 2015 net neutrality rules.

Recently, many Verizon Wireless customers reported their Netflix and YouTube speeds appeared to be capped at 10 Mbps. Verizon acknowledged that it was conducting “network testing” to “optimize” its video streaming, and claimed that it was reasonable network management. Verizon’s actions and the cloud of uncertainty surrounding their practices is a timely reminder that, absent a strong regulator, Internet service providers can and will use their gatekeeper power to harm consumers and grow their own market power. If you want to connect to the internet, and access all the services that you can get through that connection (from entertainment to education to employment) you must go through an internet service provider. Broadband companies know they have substantial leverage in the internet ecosystem, which is why it is so vital for the FCC to actively combat harmful practices such as throttling.

For the past few days, rumors have been swirling that Sprint wants to merge with Charter Communications. If the two got together, it could be a major deal, combining the wireless and cable industries in a big, new way. But now reports suggest that Charter, the nation's second-biggest cable company, simply isn't interested in a deal. There are indications that Sprint and its parent company, Softbank, aren't yet ready to give up on Charter. But why is Sprint so hellbent on a tie-up with the cable giant in the first place, and why doesn't Charter want to partner with America's fourth-biggest cellphone carrier?

The deal could mean new bundles of services. You might, for example, be able to buy Sprint's wireless service together with Charter's cable service. And much like AT&T has done with DirecTV, it's possible Sprint could seek to put Charter's video content on mobile to attract and retain customers. But, since Charter is working on a pilot of its wireless plans, it's still early enough in the process that the cable company can afford to wait.

[Commentary] As wireless broadband carriers transition what was once referred to as “dumb pipes” to a richer content delivery system, the subject of net neutrality is becoming about as hot as the surface of the sun.

OTT or Over-the-Top content delivery will only continue to skyrocket through the carriers. Subscribers want their television, movies and music all on-the-go, and the continued marketing of unlimited data plans will continue that momentum. Instead of making thinly-veiled excuses or outright violation of net neutrality rules, the carriers will need to ensure network optimization for video consumption. 5G will help with lower latency and dramatically improved throughput but we are still 18 to 24 months away from a ubiquitous deployment. If the tier one global carriers don’t address it now, they will certainly suffer from subscriber loss, lower revenue and dwindling margins.

[Will Townsend is a Moor Insights & Strategy senior analyst covering wireless telecommunications and enterprise networking]

On June 21, 2017, Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John Thune (R-SD) wrote to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai regarding wireless spectrum, writing, "I am pleased to hear that the Commission may be considering a new proceeding to identify new spectrum uses in a range of bands. As you look for ways to better utilize spectrum, I urge you to explore possible new allocations in the mid-band frequencies, perhaps including the 3.7 GHz and 6 GHz bands, and to begin a rulemaking proceeding focused on opening mid-band spectrum for both licensed and unlicensed networks."

On July 18, Chairman Pai responded by saying, "I have asked my colleagues at the Commission's August Open Meeting to initiate a new inquiry into opportunities for next-generation services--particularly wire less broadband services- in the spectrum range of 3. 7 GHz to 24 GHz. This inquiry will be conducted in close coordination with the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, and will focus on exploring opportunities in the mid-band frequencies for expanded flexible use. This inquiry will also explore long-term strategies the Commission can pursue to promote expanded spectrum access to meet the growing demand."

[Commentary] The current network neutrality regulations set forth in the 2015 Open Internet Order (2015 OIO) prohibit Internet service providers (ISPs) from blocking or throttling lawful content or engaging in paid prioritization of Internet traffic. These three “bright line rules” cover a wide swath of ISP practices and are intended to promote competition and ensure quality service transmission for content providers and end users. At the same time, however, they fail to consider more nuanced issues that complicate achieving these outcomes.

Christopher Yoo, Professor of Law, Communication, and Computer and Information Science at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, and founding director of the Center for Technology, Innovation, and Competition, makes the case for one such issue in his recent work, “.” This post is the sixth in a series featuring the contents of a recent special issue of the Review of Industrial Organization, organized by the Technology Policy Institute and the University of Pennsylvania’s Center for Technology, Innovation, and Competition. Yoo argues that, contrary to the FCC’s claim in the Order, practices like zero rating can stimulate competition among infrastructure providers and edge services. He contends that zero rating should not be prohibited but rather handled on a case-by-case basis. He supports these claims with economic theory, competition theory, and a number of case studies featuring zero rating.

[Romzek is a 2017 Google Policy Fellow and Research Associate at the Technology Policy Institute. Wallsten is President and Senior Fellow at TPI]

This report provides details on two separate spectrum auctions conducted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that included: 1) the 1710 to 1755 megahertz (MHz) band, and 2) the 1695-1710 MHz and 1755-1780 MHz bands. This report covers the period from January through December 2016.

The Federal Communications Commission will hold an Open Meeting on Thursday, August 3, 2017 for the subjects listed below:
Connect America Fund Phase II Auction (Auction 903) – The Commission will consider a Public Notice to initiate the pre-auction process for the Connect America Fund Phase II auction which will award up to $198 million annually for 10 years to service providers that commit to offer voice and broadband services to fixed locations in unserved high-cost areas. (AU Docket No. 17-182)
Mobility Fund Phase II Challenge Process – The Commission will consider an Order on Reconsideration and Second Report and Order that lays out a robust challenge process that will enable the Commission to direct Mobility Fund Phase II support to primarily rural areas that lack unsubsidized 4G Long Term Evolution (LTE) service. (WC Docket No. 10-90; WT Docket No.10-208)
Form 477 - The Commission will consider a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that takes a focused look at the Commission’s Form 477 to improve the value of the data we continue to collect. (WC Docket No. 11-10)
Expanding Flexible Use in Mid-Band Spectrum Between 3.7 GHz and 24 GHz – The Commission will consider a Notice of Inquiry that explores opportunities for next generation services – particularly for wireless broadband – in the 3.7 GHz to 24 GHz spectrum range and asks about how we can increase efficient and effective use of this spectrum for the benefit of all services and users. (GN Docket No. 17-183)
Wireless License Renewal and Service Continuity Reform – The Commission will consider a Second Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would adopt unified construction, renewal, and service continuity rules for the Wireless Radio Services, while seeking comment on a range of additional possible actions to increase the number of Americans with access to wireless communications services. (WTB Docket No. 10-112)
Transmitter Identification Requirements for Satellite Digital Video Uplink Transmissions – The Commission will consider a Memorandum Opinion and Order that waives the requirement that satellite news trucks, and other temporary-fixed satellite earth stations transmitting digital video, comply with the Digital Video Broadcasting-Carrier Identification (DVB-CID) standard if the earth station uses a modulator that cannot meet the DVB-CID standard through a software upgrade. (IB Docket No. 12-267)
Hearing Designation Order – The Commission will consider a Hearing Designation Order.