<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

[IP] more on FCC adopts rules for broadband over power lines





Begin forwarded message:

From: Gerry Faulhaber <gerry-faulhaber@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: October 16, 2004 12:48:27 AM GMT+01:00
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [IP] more on FCC adopts rules for broadband over power lines

Dave [for IP, if you like]---

Re: Brett Glass' reaction to BPL:

"...three large, entrenched monopolies"? Just a reminder: monopoly means one firm, not three. Which is generally more competitive than two. Which firms (cable and telco) seem to be pretty rivalrous, at least here in Philadelphia. I welcome this third potential entrant, although it is not my experience that power distribution companies are terrifically innovative. BPL has the potential to bring to broadband market what AT&T Wireless brought to the cellular market: sharp and intense price/feature competition. That's why Powell's high on this, and it's why I'm high on it.

It seems to me the FCC is moving relatively quickly to get remaining spectrum either into the market or into some form of commons (Part 15 spectrum), for purposes of wireless broadband (which the FCC has been championing for years: MMDS, etc.). Of course "quickly" for any government agency means pretty long, but they are definitely working the problem, despite Mr. Glass' moaning.

Not getting spectrum out at prices ISPs can afford for wireless BB? Is the FCC supposed to be the ISPs mommy? The licensed spectrum will go at auction and those who value it most will get it. If ISPs think it's valuable for wireless BB that will be reflected in their bids. If they don't, they won't, and they'll be out of the game. They are running with the Big Dogs; if they can't keep up, tough. I'm high on wireless BB; we're seeing just the beginning with Verizon Wireless' currently national rollout of 1xEVDO; when Intel gets its WiMax trucks rolling, that'll blow the market wide open.

And complaining that WiFi is in Part 15 spectrum so that there is potential interference from cordless phones? Good God, the tech community has been championing commons spectrum, telling us how technology will solve the interference problem. And now we are whining that there's interference at 2.4 GHz? No kidding; what do you think happens in a commons? Rather than whining that ISPs don't have dedicated spectrum for BB, why not actually implement the tech community's claim to be able to solve interference with appropriate hardware/software protocols so we can use commons/Part 15 spectrum?

Professor Gerald R. Faulhaber
Business and Public Policy Dept.
Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, PA 19104

----- Original Message ----- From: "David Farber" <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Ip" <ip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2004 5:46 PM
Subject: [IP] more on FCC adopts rules for broadband over power lines




Begin forwarded message:

From: Brett Glass <brett@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: October 15, 2004 3:44:57 PM GMT+01:00
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx, Ip <ip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [IP] FCC adopts rules for broadband over power lines

David:

The truly sad thing about this development is that -- as with telephone and cable lines -- the FCC is opting to give utility monopolies the ability to prevent other providers from using their facilities. Thus, in many cases, a consumer may have a choice between at most three large, entrenched monopolies when seeking wired broadband service, and in most cases only one or two. At the same time, the FCC is continuing to hobble wireless broadband by refusing to reserve spectrum exclusively for that purpose or provide licensed spectrum that it is practical for ISPs to buy. This means that wireless cannot be competitive in terms of reliability. A cordless phone can, without warning, disrupt Internet service to an entire building or even to the entire area served by an ISP's wireless access point.

If things continue on their present course, the FCC will be awarding to large, entrenched, rapacious corporations a monopoly on reliable broadband access. Good for the GOP's corporate patrons, but bad for the rest of us.

--Brett Glass

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as gerry-faulhaber@xxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/