[ NNSquad ] Reuters: Internet Providers Seek Low Broadband Bar

[Tim Karr <tkarr@freepress.net>]

The Free Press' submission cited in story is here:

www.freepress.net/files/FreePress_Broadband_Definition_Comments.pdf<http://=
www.freepress.net/files/FreePress_Broadband_Definition_Comments.pdf>

A summary of our FCC recommendations is here:

http://www.freepress.net/node/72325

 - - -

U.S. Internet Providers Seek Low Broadband Bar

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2009/09/01/afx6839478.html
Thomson Reuters
By John Poirier
09.01.09, 08:08 PM EDT

WASHINGTON, Sept 1 (Reuters) - The biggest U.S. Internet service
providers urged regulators to adopt a conservative definition of
'broadband,' arguing for minimum speeds that were substantially below
many other nations.

The submissions were filed with the Federal Communications Commission
which had sought comments by Aug. 31 on how the agency should define
broadband for a report to be submitted to Congress early next year.

The Obama administration is seeking ways to extend broadband services
to both unserved Americans living in rural areas and to make broadband
affordable for those living in urban areas.

Some of the submissions from service providers argued for a definition
that even undercut an international ranking of U.S. Internet speed.

A 2008 study by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development showed that the United States ranked 19th with an
advertised rate of 9.6 megabytes per second (mbps). The top three
countries were Japan with 92.8 mbps, Korea with 80.8 mbps and France
with 51 mbps.

'The definition must include those services that Americans actually
need and want -- and can afford -- to participate in the
Internet-driven economy,' AT&T Inc said in its comment letter to the
FCC.

AT&T said regulators should keep in mind that not all applications
like voice over Internet protocol (VoIP) or streaming video, that
require faster sp= eeds, are necessarily needed by unserved Americans.

Verizon Communications Inc and Verizon Wireless, a joint venture
between Verizon and Vodafone Group Plc, urged the FCC to maintain
speeds of at least = 0.768 mbps downstream and 0.200 mbps upstream.

Those speeds are being used by the U.S. government in administering
$7.2 billion in loans and grants for broadband projects as part of the
U.S. economic stimulus package.

'It would be disruptive and introduce confusion if the commission were
to now create a new and different definition,' Verizon said in its
letter.

Comcast Corp, the biggest cable provider, said that 'simpler is
better' and that the actual online experience of any particular
consumer at any particular moment in time involves a wide range of
factors.

'Many of which are outside the control of the Internet service
provider,' Comcast said in its letter, which argued for defining
'basic' broadband as having a downstream and upstream speed of 0.256
mbps.

However, Free Press, a public interest group, urged Congress and the
FCC to set the bar high and to consider broadband as a critical
infrastructure.

In its submission, Free Press urged the FCC to craft a definition with
a minimum upstream and downstream speed of at least 5 mbps for each
end user.

'We fully recognize that incumbents for the most part will scoff at a
symmetrical definition,' wrote Derek Turner, research director at Free
Press. 'The commission must ignore any such self-serving pleas for
watered-down standards.'

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski told Reuters in July that broadband
was the 'the major infrastructure challenge of our generation.'

   [ I for one want to help the big carriers deploy their "broadband"
     vision.  I believe I have a couple of ancient but serviceable
     Bell 103 acoustic modems around, that I'd be happy to donate to
     Verizon, Comcast, or any other dominant carrier in keeping with
     the sort of "simpler and slower is better" philosophy being
     expressed by carriers to the FCC.  Just dig out some old
     2500-type telephone handsets, ram them into the rubber cups on
     the modems, and you're ready to fly at a subscriber-pleasing 300
     bits per second!  Of course, videos will take just a *little*
     while longer to upload to YouTube, but if this keeps the ISP big
     boys happy and well fed, it's certainly worth the sacrifice!
     
       -- Lauren Weinstein
          NNSquad Moderator ]