Georgia Institute of TechnologyCenter for Advanced Communications Policy
Atlanta SkylineTechnology Square at night

Telecom/IT Policy Highlights

Volume: 6.06
June/July 2006

Contents:
Overview
Policy / Legislative Activities
Regulatory Activities
Judicial Activities
Research / Reports
Items of Interest
Events
Newsletter Info
  • Overview

    In this special summer issue of the Telecom/IT Policy Highlights we call attention to the major legislative, policy/regulatory, and judicial events during the past two months. In Congress, the focus of lawmakers has shifted from introducing new legislation to refining the most promising bills and bringing them to the floors of their respective chambers for votes. In the race to conclude telecommunications-related lawmaking before the end of the legislative year and beginning of election season, the House of Representatives has taken an early lead. In June, the full House overwhelmingly passed the “Communications Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhancement Act of 2006.”

    Among its numerous sections, the bill would establish a national franchise system for video services and permit the entry of telephone companies into the video services arena dominated by cable and satellite service providers. In late June, the Senate Commerce Committee completed the mark-up of the “Advanced Telecommunications and Opportunity Reform Act” (formerly the “Communications, Consumer’s Choice, and Broadband Deployment Act of 2006”). Like the House bill, the Senate bill would address franchising. It is a more extensive bill, however, and would establish an “Internet Bill of Rights” and mandate reforms for the Universal Service Fund, among other things. Notable about both of these bills is the strong bipartisan support they have elicited in both the House and Senate. Nevertheless, concerns remain about the absence of explicit “net neutrality” clauses in either bill. An even more pressing concern is the pending conclusion of the legislative year. In particular, it remains unclear if and when the Senate telecommunications bill will come to the floor for a vote. The summer has been marked by more extensive work in the regulatory and policy arena, as the FCC has been very busy this summer. With the recent additions of Commissioners Deborah Taylor Tate and Robert M. McDowell, the FCC has heightened its interest in addressing a number of important issues.

    In particular, we call attention to rulemaking procedures on Universal Service Fund (USF) and Telecommunications Relay Service (TRS) Fund reform. As the 2006 hurricane season crests, the FCC addresses how best to enact the recommendations of an independent panel commissioned to study the effects of Hurricane Katrina on telecommunications. The FCC is also addressing media ownership. Several court decisions discussed below also touch upon the work of the FCC, particularly in the areas of spectrum auctions and regulatory forbearance.


    BACK TO TOP OF PAGE
  • Policy / Legislative Activities

    House Overwhelmingly Passes Barton’s COPE Bill
    06.09.2006 – The House voted 321-101 in favor of Rep. Joe Barton’s (R-TX) telecommunications bill entitled the “Communications Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhancement Act of 2006” [H.R. 5252]. Commonly referred to as the “COPE Act,” the bipartisan bill has 55 cosponsors. The COPE Act paves the way for the establishment of a national franchise system for cable and other video services through what supporters such as Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) have termed “deregulatory parity.”

    The bill contains six major provisions. Most important among these is an amendment to the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that will replace the regulatory role of more than 30,000 local franchising authorities with a national system to be supervised by the FCC. If passed into law, the COPE Act will enable telephone companies such as a Verizon and AT&T to enter the cable television market by circumventing the authority of municipal regulatory officials who have historically dealt with cable and satellite companies in the provision of video services. Supporters of this cornerstone of the proposed legislation have argued that it will promote increased competition in the provision of these services and ultimately result in lower costs for consumers.

    Despite strong bipartisan support for the COPE Act, the bill has its fair share of detractors in the House. In response to arguments that the bill will increase competition and lower subscribers’ cable bills, some House Democrats have argued that new national franchise rules will reduce considerably the funding that cable companies have provided to municipalities for public, educational, and governmental programs. In addition, opponents of the bill contend that a lack of build-out requirements for telephone companies mean that consumers in less affluent neighborhoods or more remote areas probably will not see the benefits of increased competition between cable and telephone companies over the provision of video services.

    Much of the criticism for the COPE Act, however, continues to focus on the lack of “net neutrality” in the bill. Critics have argued that the lack of any provision preventing cable and telephone companies from charging content providers for offering faster, or premium, services undermines the free and open architecture of the Internet. Moreover, a lack of net neutrality conditions in the proposed legislation may mean that these companies, which are increasingly involved in the content business, will favor their own services over those of their competitors. In order to prevent telephone and cable providers from charging Internet providers a premium to carry such services, Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA) and other Democrats sought to amend the COPE Act with legislation that would prohibit such practices and ensure “net neutrality.” However, this amendment failed in the House by a vote of 269 to 152. Nevertheless, the COPE Act gives the FCC the authority to enforce a measure that prohibits a broadband service provider from requiring a subscriber, as a condition for such service, to purchase any cable, telecommunications, or VoIP service offered by that provider. [Sources: Library of Congress, New York Times, Wall Street Journal]

    Senate Commerce Committee Approves Telecom Bill
    06.28.2006 – The Senate Commerce Committee approved a telecommunications reform bill sponsored by Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) and Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-HI) in a Commerce Committee Markup session on June 28th. Originally entitled the “Communications, Consumer’s Choice, and Broadband Deployment Act of 2006” [S. 2686], the bill was renamed the “Advanced Telecommunications and Opportunity Reform Act” [H.R. 5252] by the Senate Commerce Committee. Despite its similarities to the “COPE Act” passed earlier in the month by the House, this bill also has some striking differences as well. The Senate bill incorporates 11 titles that address an array of telecommunications issues, including interoperability funding, the Universal Service Fund, municipal broadband services, video franchise reform, digital television transition, and the illegal transmission of child pornography. In developing the renamed "Advanced Telecommunications and Opportunity Reform Act,” the Senate Commerce Committee, led by co-chairs Stevens and Inouye, held 26 hearings and 6 listening sessions.

    The Senate bill would codify an “Internet Consumer Bill of Rights” that would guarantee users’ freedom to freely navigate the World Wide Web. Internet service providers would be required to allow subscribers to access and post any lawful content; access any web page; access and use any voice, video, or e-mail application of their choice; access and run any software or search engine service; and connect any legal device of their choice. Despite this consumer bill of rights, the proposed legislation failed to include any protections for net neutrality. During the markup session, Senators Olympia Snowe (RME) and Byron Dorgan (D-ND) attempted to add such a clause that would bar discrimination of content or service based on origin, destination, or ownership. However, the vote on this proposal deadlocked in an 11-11 vote and failed to get the majority it needed. Opponents of a net neutrality clause such as the one espoused by Snowe and Dorgan contend that without evidence of such discriminatory activities against consumers, such a mandate would impede the competition, innovation, and deployment promoted by the bill’s sponsors.

    As in the House’s COPE Act, the Senate bill would also establish a national franchise system for video services, allowing providers to circumvent local regulatory authorities in gaining access to markets. In particular, the bill would reduce the time needed to complete the franchising process, from several years in some cases, to no more than 90 days. This provision would also lay the groundwork for permitting telephone companies to enter the video services market. In addition, the bill would update the Universal Service Fund program by mandating a new system of audits and metrics for analysis. Even more important would be provisions to ensure that all communications providers, namely Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) providers, are making appropriate contributions to the USF. Finally, the bill stipulates a $500 million account for financing broadband development in underserved areas. Despite the passage of a somewhat different version of this bill in the House, concerns remain over whether this bill will be scheduled for a vote before the end of the legislative year. Because of the November elections, Congress has a dwindling number of work days left in the session. [Sources: Library of Congress, Senate Commerce Committee, New York Times, and Reuters]


    BACK TO TOP OF PAGE
  • Regulatory Activities

    Digital Television Coupon Program Proposed by NTIA
    07.20.2006 – The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) of the Department of Commerce has issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [Docket No. 060512129-6129-01] as part of its plan to implement and administer a program to provide $40 coupons for consumers to use in the purchase of digital-to-analog converter boxes. Congress mandated the coupon program in Title III of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. The converter boxes are necessary for consumers who wish to continue receiving broadcast programming over the air using analog-only televisions after February 18, 2009, the date that full-power televisions stations are required to cease analog broadcasting. Without converter boxes, consumers with analog-only television sets will be unable to view full-power television broadcasts unless they purchase digital television sets or subscribe to cable or satellite service.

    NTIA’s NPRM on the proposed rules invites public comment on such issues as which U.S. households should receive the coupons to help purchase a digital converter box; and restrictions for the coupons; the application process; coupon expiration; manufacturing standard for the converter box; and coupon distribution system that will avoid waste, fraud, and abuse.

    Comments on the NPRM are due by September 25, 2006. A copy is available: [http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/frnotices/2006/couponprogram_nprm_07202006.htm] (HTML,PDF,and WordPerfect versions also available) [Source: NTIA]

    Katrina Panel’s Findings Prompt FCC Rulemaking Efforts
    06.19.2006 – The FCC has released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [FCC 06-83] to address the findings and implement the recommendations of the Independent Panel Reviewing the Impact of Hurricane Katrina on Communications Networks. On June 12, the Independent Panel issued its final report and recommendations, which may be categorized into four areas: 1) pre-positioning the communications industry and the government for disasters in order to achieve greater network reliability and resiliency; 2) improving recovery coordination to address existing shortcomings and to maximize the use of existing resources; 3) improving the operability and interoperability of public safety and 911 communications in times of crisis; and 4) improving communication of emergency information to the public.
    On July 26, 2006, the FCC issued a Request for Comment on Applicability of Recommendations to All Types of Disasters [DA 06-1524]. In this public notice, the FCC reminded the public of its comment cycle applicable to its NPRM on Hurricane Katrina, while also requesting comment on how the Katrina Panel’s recommendations might be applicable to all natural disasters (earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, forest fires) and other incidents (terrorist attacks, epidemics, accidents). For a copy of the NPRM with information on comments and a copy of the Independent Panel’s report, please see [http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06- 83A1.txt]. Comments for this proceeding are due by August 7, 2006, and reply comments are due on or before August 21, 2006. A copy of the FCC’s reminder and public notice is available at [http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06- 1524A1.txt]. [Source: FCC]

    Media Ownership Under Review by Commission; Rules on Media Transfer
    06.21.2006 – The FCC adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [FCC 06-93] soliciting public comment on how the Commission should best address several issues raised by the ruling of U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit two years ago. In its ruling for Prometheus v. FCC, the Court stayed and remanded several media ownership rules the Commission had adopted in its 2002 Biennial Review Order, while affirming others. Responding to the rules remanded by the Court of Appeals, the Commission asks three questions in this NPRM: 1) Should the FCC revise the limits adopted in the 2002 Biennial Review on the number of stations that can be commonly owned in one market?; 2) Should the FCC revise those numerical limits, or does any evidence available to justify them?; and 3) How should the FCC address radio/television and newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership issues?

    In a related story, the FCC approved the sale of practically all of the cable systems and assets of Adelphia Communications Corporation to Time Warner, Inc. and Comcast Corporation on July 13, 2006. In its Memorandum Opinion and Order [FCC 06-105], the Commission approved a plan to rescue Adelphia from pending bankruptcy by allowing Time Warner and Comcast to acquire Adelphia’s failing cable systems in several states and follow-through with a plan to update and modernize these systems. In making its decision, the FCC found that the plan, as ordered, serves the public interest and complies with all laws and regulatory rulemaking. While the FCC did note some potential public interest harms to the plan, the Commission ultimately ruled that the benefits outweighed potential negatives. In particular, the FCC argued that consumers would benefit from the resolution of the Adelphia bankruptcy proceeding and new investments and upgrades made to the cable network by its new owners. In addition, subscribers are expected to benefit from accelerated deployment of VoIP service and advanced video services such as video on demand (VOD). Nevertheless, the Commission did note some potentially harmful effects from the merger, such as negative impacts on regional and national sports programming. In response, the FCC ordered remedial actions in this and several other areas to offset potential harms. Despite approving the merger, the Commission’s action was not unanimous. Commissioner Adelstein approved in part and dissented in part, while Commissioner Copps dissented over the agreement. In particular, Copps argued that the merger would diminish competition, adversely affect programming diversity, and undermine broadband and net neutrality. In a separate press release, FCC Chairman Martin noted that despite some differences of opinion by the panel, he believed that approving members had attempted to stipulate conditions to ensure adequate competition and ensure programming diversity, especially in sports. On the subject of net neutrality, however, Martin conceded that disagreement on net neutrality still persists within the industry and among policy experts. He concluded that, without evidence of harm to consumers or Internet users, the merger should continue. The FCC text of the NPRM on the Media Ownership Proceeding may be found at [http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-93A1.txt]. Comments on the NPRM on media ownership are due on or before September 22, 2006, and reply comments, on or before November 21, 2006. The more specific MO&O on the Adelphia/Time Warner/Comcast license transfer is available at [http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-105A1.txt]. [Source: FCC]

    TRS Compensation Issues Addressed by FCC
    07.13.2006 – The FCC adopted a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [FCC 06-106] that seeks comment on a wide variety of issues related to the Interstate Telecommunications Relay Service (TRS) Fund and the compensation of service providers. Title IV of the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires that common carriers who provide voice communication services also provide persons with hearing and speech disabilities access to the telephone system and its services. Such services are generally carried out through the TRS, which provides for facilities staffed by communications assistants (CA) who facilitate communications through a variety of means, such as TTY/TTD phones, Internet Protocol (IP) relay, Speech-to-Speech (STS), and video relay services (VRS). In this FNPRM, the FCC is seeking comment on four issues in particular. First, the Commission requests input on alternative cost recovery methodologies for interstate traditional TRS, STS, and IP Relay. One plan of interest is a proposal by Hamilton Relay,

    Inc., called the Multi-state Average Relay Structure, or “MARS” plan. The FCC is also seeking to determine whether these communications means—traditional TRS, STS, and IP Relay—should be compensated at the same rate. In addition to this larger issue, the FCC seeks comment on the appropriate cost recovery methodology for VRS and the length of time the VRS rate should remain in effect. The Commission is also interested in issues related to “reasonable” costs compensable under the present cost recovery methodology. Especially important here is whether marketing and outreach expenses, overhead costs, and executive compensation are compensable from the TRS Fund. Finally, the FCC seeks to address ways to improve the management and administration of TRS. As with similar reforms underway for the USF, the Commission is exploring the adoption of measures to assess performance and efficiency of the TRS Fund and develop means to deter waste, fraud, and abuse. Regarding this last concern of the FCC—the elimination and prevention of fraud and abuse within TRS—it should be noted that the FCC released a separate FNPRM on the misuse of IP Relay and VRS [FCC 06-58] in May. The current FNPRM to address TRS compensation will probably consider the comments generated by the earlier case in helping the FCC to make its decision.

    A copy of the current FCC FNPRM on TRS Fund compensation may be found at [http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-106A1.txt]. Comments on this FNPRM will be due 45 days after its publication in the Federal Register and replies 15 days thereafter. [Source: FCC]

    Universal Service Fund Updates Proposed by Commission
    06.27.2006 – The FCC has issued a Report and Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [FCC 06-94] implementing two major changes to the Universal Service Fund. First, the FCC has raised the wireless “safe harbor” percentage used to estimate interstate revenue for the USF from 28.5 to 37.1 percent of total-end user telecommunications revenue. The first increase to the wireless safe harbor since 2002, the FCC cited growing demand for wireless telecommunications services for their decision. Despite the change in percentage, the Commission continued to provide wireless providers with the option to base contributions to the USF on their actual revenues or traffic studies that estimate their actual interstate revenues, rather than using the safe harbor percentage. Second, the FCC voted to extend USF contribution obligations to interconnected voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) service providers. This rulemaking will provide greater revenue for the USF, abetted by the Commission’s decision to establish an interim safe harbor percentage of interstate revenue at 64.9 percent of total VoIP service revenue. As with wireless services, VoIP providers will have the option of calculating their interstate revenues based on the safe harbor percentage, actual revenues, or traffic studies.

    The FCC’s actions in this R&O and NRPM are what it considers “measured interim steps,” which will permit the FCC to make gradual changes to the contribution base of the USF. Hence, more changes may be expected from the Commission in the near future, as it determines how best to reform contribution methodology while minimizing the impacts on interested stakeholders—consumers, USF contributors, and USF administrators—in the short term. As such, the NPRM issued by the Commission seeks comment on the interim contribution obligations imposed in the R&O. For a copy of the R&O and NPRM on these changes to the USF, please see [http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-94A1.txt]. Comments are due on or before August 9, 2006, and reply comments are due no later than September 8, 2006. [Source: FCC]


    BACK TO TOP OF PAGE
  • Judicial Activities

    FCC Remanded Over Denial of SBC’s Petition for Forbearance
    06.27.2006 – The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit handed down its decision in AT&T v. FCC [DC App. Ct. No. 05-1186], effectively ruling against the FCC. At issue was the contention by SBC (later AT&T) that the FCC improperly denied the company’s claims for forbearance from Title II common carrier regulation. According to Section 10 of the Communications Act of 1934 [47 U.S.C. § 160 (a)], the FCC should refrain from regulating any telecommunications carrier or service under a specific set of guidelines. SBC filed for a forbearance from FCC Title II regulation on the grounds that its Internet Protocol (IP) platform services rendered it exempt from common carrier regulation. In response to SBC’s argument that services that enable customers to “send or receive communications in IP format over an IP platform, and the IP platforms from which those services are provided” should be exempt, the FCC ruled in a 2005 Memorandum Opinion and Order [FCC 05-95] that it disagreed with SBC’s contention. The Commission found that, 1) it would be inappropriate to grant a forbearance for requirements that might not apply to the facilities and services in question, as well as concluding that, 2) SBC’s case was based on insufficient evidence and not specific enough to determine whether Section 10 applied to the matter at hand.

    In an opinion issued by the Court of Appeals, the FCC lacked authority to reject SBC’s petition as “procedurally improper” just because it requested forbearance from uncertain regulatory obligations. In this matter, the Court rejected the FCC’s first rationale for denying the petition for forbearance. Regarding the second justification made by the Commission, the Court of Appeals found that the FCC failed to explain this rationale with the specificity standard it has applied in other contexts. On this issue, the Court of Appeals has remanded the case for further explanation and consideration consistent with its opinion. 9 Studies/ Reports For a copy of the Court of Appeals’ opinion in this case, please see [http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200606/05-1186a.pdf] (PDF only). [Sources: U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and FCC]

    Settlement Reached in FCC Auction Fraud Case
    07.13.2006 – A prominent U.S. investor, Mario Gabelli, and 38 individuals and companies affiliated with him have reached a settlement with the federal government over claims that Gabelli and his associates fraudulently bid in wireless license auctions conducted by the FCC. The agreement will see Gabelli and affiliates pay $130 million to the government. The settlement resolves charges that the defendant’s company, Lynch Interactive Corporation, provided financial backing for dozens of shell companies to acquire spectrum licenses reserved for small companies in eight auctions between 1995 and 2000.

    At stake in this case was the integrity of the FCC auction program. The FCC routinely makes available spectrum licenses for very small companies. While such bidders are allowed to have financial backers for the purpose of obtaining these licenses, these backers are not allowed to possess de facto control over those bidding companies. The federal government alleged that such an illicit arrangement is exactly what transpired in the acquisition of spectrum licenses by Gabelli and his associates. Prosecutors pointed to the fact that many entrepreneurs involved in the acquisition of the FCC licenses, including an aerobics instructor, basketball player, and relatives of Gabelli, had no prior links to the telecommunication industry. These individuals and the small companies they represented are alleged to have been fronts for the acquisition of licenses by Gabelli. Even worse, prosecutors contended, was the sale of some licenses for substantial profits. While it is unclear how much Gabelli-backed companies made from the sale of discounted licenses, one consultant working for the original plaintiff in the case has suggested $206 million.

    Suit against Gabelli was originally brought by lawyer R. C. Taylor III, who initiated his case under the whistle-blower provisions of the False Claims Act. After Taylor gathered sufficient evidence in his case, the federal government joined the lawsuit as a plaintiff. For his help in recovering funds allegedly lost by Gabelli’s fraudulent activities, Taylor will receive $32.2 million in compensation from the federal government. [Sources: Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Reuters]


    BACK TO TOP OF PAGE
  • Research / Reports

    High Speed Internet Connections Increase in 2005
    07.26.2006 – The FCC’s Wireline Competition Bureau has released its latest report on high speed connections to the Internet. Entitled “High-Speed Services for Internet Access,” the report covers developments between January 1 and December 31, 2005 and is drawn from data provided by facilities-based broadband providers.

    The FCC report covers three main areas of concern: 1) high-speed lines (connections delivering at speeds exceeding 200 kilobits per second in at least one direction), 2) advanced services lines (connections delivering at speeds exceeding 200 kbps in both directions), and 3) geographic coverage. According to the study, high-speed lines increased by 18 percent, from 42.4 million to 50.2 million, during the second half of 2005. This increase compared favorably with an increase of 12 percent during the first half of 2005. In sum, high-speed lines increased by 33 percent, or 12.3 million lines, during the whole of 2005. Even more impressive was the development of advanced service lines, which increased 48 percent (13.9 million) to 42.8 million lines in 2005. Finally, the FCC determined in its study that highspeed DSL connections were available to 78 percent of households to whom incumbent carriers could provide local telephone service at the end of 2005. Even more positive, high-speed cable modem service was available to 93 percent of households to whom cable system operators could provide cable television service. In a survey of Zip Codes by the FCC, 99 percent of the United States’ Zip Codes had at least one high-speed Internet provider available to consumers.

    For a copy of Wireline Competition Bureau’s study, please see [http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-266596A1.pdf] (Available as a PDF and Microsoft Word document. For MS Word version, substitute [.doc] for [.pdf] at the end of the aforementioned address.) [Source: FCC]

    Local Telephone Service Competition Data Released by FCC
    07.26.2006 – The FCC has released its latest report on the status of local telephone service competition in the United States, as of December 31, 2005. The data presented in the report provides evidence that local telephone service remains competitive in much of the United States. At least one competitive local exchange carrier (CLEC) serves customers in 82 percent of the nation’s Zip Codes, in which 98 percent of the United States’ population resides. In addition, multiple carriers reported providing service in the major population centers of the nation. Regarding long distance service, the data collected by the FCC indicated that incumbent local exchange carriers (LEC) were the presubscribed long distance carrier for 51 percent of the switched access lines they provided to end users. Conversely, CLECs were the long distance carriers for 79 percent of their switched access lines. While not the focus of the report, increases in mobile phone service were prominent. Mobile telephony providers reported 203.7 million subscribers at the end of 2005. This figure represents an increase of 22.6 million, or 12 percent, more than a year earlier.

    A copy of the FCC report and data on local telephone service competition is available at [http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-266595A1.pdf] (Both PDF and Microsoft Word documents available. For MS Word document, substitute [.doc] for [.pdf] in the aforementioned address.) [Source: FCC]

    Telecommuting Options Underused by Many Americans
    07.12.2006 – A study conducted by Robert H. Smith School of Business at the University of Maryland and Rockbridge Associates, Inc. of Great Falls, Virginia, suggests that few American workers who can telecommute actually do so. According to the “National Technology Readiness Survey,” two percent of U.S. employees telecommute on a fulltime basis, while an additional nine percent do so part-time. However, telecommuting options appear to be vastly underused. According to the study, an additional 14 percent of American workers have the ability to telecommute or work in jobs amenable to such an arrangement, but choose not to take advantage of the opportunity. Evidence suggests that maximizing telecommuting opportunities to include a quarter of all American workers could save $3.9 billion in gasoline per year. However, Professor P.K. Kannan, a lead researcher in the study, concluded that Americans would prefer to work at the office, even if their employer allowed telecommuting arrangements. (Source: PC Magazine)


    BACK TO TOP OF PAGE
  • Items of Interest


    Intersection of Wireless and Broadband Addressed in NTIA Official’s Speech
    06.28.2006 – Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information John M. R. Kneuer, from the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), gave a speech at the Wireless Communications Association International 2006 conference in Washington, D.C., on June 28, 2006. Entitled “The Intersection of Wireless and Broadband: Administration Spectrum Policy,” Kneuer’s speech focused on the President’s broadband vision and the efforts of NTIA to meet the Bush Administration’s goal of universal, affordable access to broadband technology by 2007. In order to overcome lagging broadband deployment faced by the United States versus Europe and Japan, Kneuer highlighted the role of wireless technologies to advance broadband proliferation, as well as federal efforts to open up the 70/80/80 GHz and 5 GHz spectrum for such applications. His talk discussed the President’s Spectrum Policy Initiative, which is committed to a comprehensive spectrum policy for the 21st century and the efforts of the Department of Commerce and NTIA, which has been charged with the implementation of the President’s plan. A copy of Acting Assistant Secretary Kneuer’s PowerPoint presentation is available on the Web: [http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/speeches/2006/JKneuer_WCA_062806_files/frame.htm]


    BACK TO TOP OF PAGE
  • Events

    CTIA Wireless I.T. and Entertainment 2006
    09.12-14.2006 – CTIA—The Wireless Association will be hosting its fall CTIA Wireless I.T. and Entertainment convention at the Los Angeles Convention Center, on September 12- 14, 2006. The focus of this convention will be integrating wireless technologies into the enterprise and vertical business markets such as healthcare, government, automotive, and retail. In addition, the event will showcase the continuing growth in wireless entertainment, ranging from music downloads to digital cameras to interactive games. The convention aspires to bring together mobile technology users, wireless carriers, and manufacturers and other companies. For more information on the CTIA convention, including registration information, please see [http://www.wirelessit.com/].


    BACK TO TOP OF PAGE
  • Newsletter Info

    Center for Advanced Communications Policy
    Telecom/IT Policy Highlights Volume 6.06
    June/July 2006

    Nathan W. Moon, Editor [nathan.moon@cacp.gatech.edu] Telecom/IT Policy Highlights presents legislative, regulatory, legal, and other items of interest pertinent to information, telecommunications, and related technology policy and research. For additional information regarding the information provided in this report, or if there are newsworthy items that should be included in future editions, please contact , Research Specialist , or , Director of Research and Editor in Chief

    BACK TO TOP OF PAGE