Lauren Frayer

The Federal Communications Commission proposed a $144,344 fine against Vearl Pennington and Michael Williamson for operating an unlicensed low-power television station in Morehead (KY). An FCC investigation found that these individuals continued to operate well after the FCC license for their station was cancelled following failure to file a renewal. The proposed fine is the maximum allowed for ongoing violations of the Communications Act, justified by the individuals’ continued operation of the station for years despite repeated warnings that they were in violation of the law.

May 11, the Federal Communications Commission received an exceptionally important contribution to the debate over restoring Internet freedom. Nineteen non-profit, government-owned Internet service providers expressed their support for my proposal to end utility-style regulation of Internet service providers based on Title II.... The fact that ISPs lacking any profit motive agree that eliminating Title II regulation will benefit consumers and promote innovation and investment is a powerful endorsement of reversing the FCC’s 2015 Title II Order.

[Commentary] The Federal communications Commission’s rulemaking process is an important step toward shaping a modern network neutrality framework that doesn’t shackle innovation to a pole erected in the era of black and white films. But ultimately the best place for that debate to be resolved on a permanent basis is through our elected representatives in Congress.

Based on the original coding of our democracy by its founders, they alone have the power to codify this core American value into law, so it is above the reach of the ebb and flow of political tides.

[Jonathan Spalter is president and CEO of USTelecom]

Sens Joe Manchin (D-WV), Roger Wicker (R-MS), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Deb Fischer (R-NE) and Jerry Moran (R-KS) introduced the Rural Wireless Access Act of 2017. This legislation would require the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to collect broadband coverage data that is valid, consistent, and robust. This standardized data is necessary to ensure that policies to expand broadband deployment accurately target the unserved and underserved communities and account for the mobile coverage experience of those living in the most remote parts of the country. Other original cosponsors include Sens Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Gary Peters (D-MI).

This bill would direct the FCC to establish a methodology to:
Ensure that wireless coverage data is collected in a consistent and robust way;
Improve the validity and reliability of wireless coverage data;
Increase the efficiency of wireless coverage data collection.

Internet access can be hard to come by at the farms and houses that dot rural Spotsylvania County (VA) near Lake Anna and Mineral. But that is changing, thanks to a new partnership between the county and the Central Rappahannock Regional Library. It’s resulted in a weekly “pop-up” library equipped with Wi–Fi at the Belmont Community Center.

Library patrons, and even those without a library card, can stop by from 4 pm to 7 pm Mondays to use one of its 15 Chromebooks and a wireless printer, as well as other library services. “It’s an area that doesn’t have a lot of broadband network service, so we’re really excited to bring these kinds of services outside of our branches and down here in the southern part of Spotsylvania,” said Chris Glover, the library’s assistant director for information technology. “It’s just a great partnership that is really providing a service for this end of the county that they haven’t been able to have before.”

Sprint and T-Mobile have begun preliminary talks to work toward a merger. The deal, if approved, would join the third- and fourth-largest US wireless companies, which together would serve 132 million subscribers.

Free Press' Craig Aaron said, “While we need more competition in the mobile-internet market, it's undeniable that these moves have given people more choice and fairer prices. That never would have happened had the Federal Communications Commission approved AT&T’s T-Mobile takeover or signaled to Sprint a willingness to approve a merger like this one in 2014. The competition between Sprint and T-Mobile is particularly important for lower-income families, many of whom rely on mobile as their only home-internet connection. If Sprint and T-Mobile merge, prices will spike and the digital divide will widen. The legal standard for approving giant mergers like this is not whether Wall Street likes it. Communications mergers must enhance competition and serve the public interest. This deal would do just the opposite: It would destroy competition and harm the public in numerous irreversible ways. So unless Ajit Pai wants his tenure at the FCC to go down as the worst for consumers in the agency’s 83-year history, the chairman should speak out and show us he’s willing to do more than rubber-stamp any harmful deal that crosses his desk.”

Tower companies are well positioned as mobile operators ramp up their network investments in coming months in advance of 5G, according to Deutsche Bank. And Sprint and AT&T are at the front of the pack.

Wireless capex among US carriers fell short of expectations in 2016 as operators tightened their belts ahead of 5G deployments. Sprint was the most notable miser among operators in terms of network spend, incrementally lowering its capex guidance in fiscal year 2016 from an initial $4.5 billion to a range of $2 billion to $2.3 billion. Sprint has yet to offer capex guidance for its current fiscal year, but it has said it expects its investments to accelerate as it continues to densify its network. Other major US carriers will begin to open their wallets, too, Deutsche Bank predicted, buoying the tower market.

CenturyLink’s proposed acquisition of Level 3 is now facing protests from two California-based consumer advocacy groups who say the combined company will place too much control of a large portion of the state’s wholesale and retail fiber into one company. This is a small blow to CenturyLink, which has remained confident that it would not have as difficult a time getting state approvals because the telecommunication company is purchasing a company that does not serve consumers.

Level 3 is mainly focused on selling a mix of wholesale services like fiber to other carriers and selling IP-based and TDM services to business customers. These groups include a coalition of consumer advocacy groups—TURN, The Greenlining Institute and the California Public Utilities Commission’s (CPUC) office of ratepayer advocates—and the California Emerging Technology Fund (CETF).

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai’s history of Internet regulation is wrong.

The government regulated Internet access under President Bill Clinton, just as it did in the last two years of Barack Obama’s term, and it did so into George W. Bush’s first term, too. The phone lines and the connections served over them — without which phone subscribers had no Internet access — did not operate in the supposedly deregulated paradise Chairman Pai mourns. Without government oversight, phone companies could have prevented dial-up Internet service providers from even connecting to customers. In the 1990s, in fact, FCC regulations more intrusive than the Obama administration’s net neutrality rules led to far more competition among early broadband providers than we have today. Pai’s nostalgia for the ’90s doesn’t extend to reviving rules that mandated competition — instead, he’s moving to scrap regulations the FCC put in place to protect customers from the telecom conglomerates that now dominate the market.

Chairman Pai talks about the importance of competition, but so have a lot of other FCC chairmen wishing that it would happen. Unfortunately, the 1990s legacy he keeps endorsing offers no hope that dumping the rules of those days will give us more competition.

[Rob Pegoraro covers technology for Yahoo Finance, USA Today, the Wirecutter and other sites. From 1999 to 2011, he wrote The Post’s personal-tech column.]

In the days following John Oliver's Sunday video on network neutrality, the Federal Communications Commission's public comment filing page has blown up. Indeed, the volume of commentary was over 10 times the amount Oliver inspired over the same number of days in 2014, when his influence was widely credited with encouraging the FCC's decision to reclassify internet service providers under Title II regulations a few months later. The comments varied greatly in form and content. The number of comments probably isn't reflective of the true number of people commenting, as some of the comments were submitted under the same name.