Opinion: The Case for Citywide Broadband in LA

Local Governments - Exclusive — 15 November 2013 Public CEO


By LA City Councilman Bob Blumenfield

Last week, Los Angeles marked 100 years since the Los Angeles Aqueduct, one of the greatest infrastructure achievements of the 20th Century, brought water to Los Angeles and set the stage for our City’s growth to become the metropolis it is today.

That same day, the Los Angeles City Council took an important step towards making a critical investment in our City’s virtual infrastructure that will ensure Los Angeles’s competitiveness in the 21st Century. The Council voted unanimously to move my proposal to bring community broadband, with potential for fiber and wireless capability forward by authorizing the City to draft a “request for proposals” (RFP).

Citywide broadband presents an enormous opportunity for Los Angeles to bridge the digital divide, create economic opportunity and attract new tourism dollars. It has the potential to truly transform our City, create jobs and make us economically competitive.



Other cities, from Chattanooga to Philadelphia, and from Corpus Christi to Riverside, CA are already experimenting with their own versions of wireless community broadband. LA would be by far the biggest City to do this and we would set the standard.

Los Angeles flirted with but abandoned an effort in 2007 to provide free WiFi but much has changed since then. First, technology has advanced exponentially, lowering costs while increasing functionality. At the same time the opportunity costs of not being online, for everyone from students to seniors, has grown exponentially. A recent study by the Public Policy Institute of California suggested that 46% of Angelenos do not have broadband in their home – the highest of any major metropolitan area in the State.

Another key difference from the City’s 2007 approach is the way I intend to go about it. Where previous efforts have focused on the City building out proprietary networks using general fund or bond dollars, I have proposed pursuing solutions that would not rely on new City investments. The request for proposals currently being drafted by the City is intended to create a public-private partnership that would leverage the City’s tremendous infrastructural assets, everything from street lights to parking meters, to fiber networks, VOiP and other contracts. The goal is to encourage creative solutions from the marketplace. Ultimately I envision free and universal basic access to the internet from San Pedro to Sylmar, with a premium portable service offered by providers which, due to the partnership with the City, would be vastly superior and cheaper to anything available today.

During my years representing the West San Fernando Valley in the California State Assembly, I was a passionate advocate for both technology improvements and infrastructure investment. I still believe that the first call for our limited dollars must be on traditional infrastructure; streets and sewers as well as services such as police and fire. However, we can “walk and chew gum” at the same time; we can partner with the private sector to build out our virtual infrastructure without harming our basic mission one iota.

In fact, if we plan properly, the two missions can complement each other, by, for instance, using street resurfacing opportunities as a window for laying down fiber-optics.

Now it is time to renew our commitment to a Los Angeles that sets the standard, not just in our physical infrastructure, but in our virtual infrastructure as well. William Mulholland didn’t think small when he envisioned the aqueduct, an engineering marvel that 100 years later supports a City of more than four million. And we must follow his example.

So what’s next? Following the Council’s vote, the RFP is currently being drafted and will be released for initial comment later this month. During the comment period we hope to hear from the public, experts and potential bidders on what they would like to see in our RFP before putting it out later this year. Once the technical and creative marketplace responds with their best ideas for making it happen, we will have a better idea of what ubiquitous broadband in Los Angeles will look like and how to get there.

I hope to one day echo the words of Mulholland and say, “There it is, use it,” to millions of City residents who will be able to access information via a citywide high-speed broadband network.

Read More

New broadband report reveals £20 return on every £1 spent

Written by BUSINESS DESK Cambridge News

For every £1 the Government is investing in broadband, the UK economy will benefit by £20, an expert report published today reveals.

UK Broadband Impact Study – Impact Report, by analysts SQW (with Cambridge Econometrics) says the Government’s investment in superfast broadband will deliver a major boost to the UK economy.

The report also shows that in addition to offering outstanding value for taxpayer money the roll-out of superfast broadband nationwide will also make a real impact on the way we live - from working at home to watching TV online.

The study is the most in-depth and rigorous examination of the impact of broadband in the UK, and looks at the economic, environmental and social benefits of superfast broadband.

As well as the return on every £1, key findings include: significant short-term boost to the UK economy as the network construction adds around £1.5 billion to the economy; adding £0.5 billion and about 11,000 jobs in 2014 alone; long-term growth to the UK economy with public investment increasing annual GVA by £6.3 billion and causing a net increase of 20,000 jobs in the UK by 2024; household savings of £45 million a year by 2024 made through people being able to work from home more.

Also, benefits to be shared across the UK, helping the rebalancing of our economy. Approximately 89 per cent of the benefits will be in areas outside London and the South East of England with rural areas set to benefit most; and around 0.4 million tonnes a year of CO2e savings through reduced commuting, business travel and firms shifting to more energy-efficient cloud computing.

Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, Maria Miller said: “What this report shows us is that as well as superfast broadband being good for economic growth it will make even more of a positive impact on the way we live, helping us work more productively and get online faster.

“Our broadband rollout is one of the best in Europe with almost three quarters of the UK able to access superfast speeds. This is making a real difference to people in communities across the UK from small businesses able to expand, school children being able to log on to do their homework or people being able to work from home. This investment in technology is vital for our future and will help Britain continue to compete in the global race and improve the way we live and work.”

Dr Pantelis Koutroumpis, advisor of the Broadband Impact Report said: “Looking at the evolution of broadband speeds in different geographies, and the on-going network deployments across the UK, this study brings new insights into the impact of improved broadband access on the national and local economies.

“Notably, the added capacity particularly affects small and medium businesses across industries, while the intervention helps address a growing digital divide. This motivates further research in the future as more empirical data become available - for example, in the relationship between business speed increases and productivity growth.”
Read more: http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Business/Business-News/New-broadband-report-reveals-20-return-on-every-1-spent-20131114113934.htm#ixzz2kkYygjC3

Read More

Netflix, YouTube Account for 50% of North American Data Traffic

 

by Karl Bode 10:43AM Monday Nov 11 2013  DSLReports

According to Sandvine’s latest Global Internet Phenomena Report, Netflix and YouTube alone account for more than 50% of all Internet traffic across North America. The study, which compiles data from more than 250 ISPs, also noted that P2P's share of overall network data continues to plummet, with peer-to-peer filesharing falling below 10% of total North American traffic (down from 60% 11 years ago). Some additional bullet-pointed statistics from the latest report:

•iOS updates accounted for 20% of North America Internet traffic on release day.

•In North America, the top 1% of subscribers who make the heaviest use of the network’s upstream resources account for 39.8 percent of total upstream traffic.

•Average monthly mobile usage in Asia-Pacific now exceeds 1 gigabyte, driven by video, which accounts for 50% of peak downstream traffic. This is more than double the 443 megabyte monthly average in North America.

•In Europe, Netflix, less than two years since launch, now accounts for over 20% of downstream traffic on certain fixed networks in the British Isles. It took almost four years for Netflix to achieve 20% of data traffic in the United States.

•Instagram and Dropbox are now top-ranked applications in mobile networks in many regions across the globe. Instagram, due to the recent addition of video, is now in Latin America the 7th top ranked downstream application on the mobile network, making it a prime candidate for inclusion in tiered data plans which are popular in the region.

•Netflix (31.6%) holds its ground as the leading downstream application in North America and together with YouTube (18.6%) accounts for over 50% of downstream traffic on fixed networks.

•P2P Filesharing now accounts for less than 10% of total daily traffic in North America. Five years ago it accounted for over 31%.

Read More

New CompTIA Mobility+ Certification Addresses Skills Needed in Mobile Environments

Nov 05, 2013 CompTIA

Downers Grove, Ill., November 5, 2013 – CompTIA, the non-profit association for the global IT industry, today introduced CompTIA Mobility+, a new industry-built, internationally-recognized skills certification for the fast-growing arena of mobile technologies.

CompTIA Mobility+ covers the knowledge and skills IT professionals need to deploy, integrate, support and manage a mobile environment, including mobile device management, troubleshooting, security and network infrastructure.

“Accommodating mobile devices and apps and optimizing the mobile experience for customers and employees alike are top priorities for virtually all organizations,” said Terry Erdle, executive vice president, skills certification, CompTIA.

“But the various facets of the mobile ecosystem present many challenges for IT professionals, who must balance user expectations with requirements for availability, reliability and security,” Erdle continued. “CompTIA Mobility+ will identify IT professionals who possess the validated skills to deploy, integrate, manage and secure mobile devices and platforms to optimize performance and mitigate risks and threats.”

Potential candidates for the CompTIA Mobility+ credential include mobility architects, mobility engineers, network administrators and security administrators. The certification is best suited for individuals who are CompTIA Network+ certified or have equivalent working knowledge; and have at least 18 months of work experience in the administration of mobile devices in the enterprise.

Complete exam objectives are available on the CompTIA Certification website.

This is this second mobility-related certification introduced by CompTIA in 2013. In October, CompTIA Mobile App Security+, a credential aimed at raising security awareness and preparedness in the mobile app development universe, was launched.

Courseware, Training Available
CompTIA Authorized Learning Content Partner Logical Operations offers its CompTIA Mobility+ courseware available through the CompTIA Marketplace and Logical Operations’ e-commerce store. The courseware’s instructor and student editions support a 32-hour, expert-facilitated class that can be taught in varying periods of time. Online assessments and eBook versions of the student manual are available through Logical Operation’s CHOICE learning platform.

Mobile Comply offers its “Mobility Plus for the IT Professional: CompTIA Mobility+ Certification Training,” both as an instructor-led offering and as a 14-day or 5-day online training. By mid-November, Mobile Comply will offer a print version of its Mobility Plus for IT Professionals curricula.

In addition to certifications for individual IT professionals, CompTIA offers other mobility-specific initiatives, including training for IT channel companies involved in or interested in offering mobility solutions to their customers; the CompTIA Mobility Community, a group of industry thought-leaders who are shaping the mobility market; and leading market intelligence and research on mobility topics and trends.

About CompTIA
CompTIA is the voice of the world’s information technology (IT) industry. Its members are the companies at the forefront of innovation; and the professionals responsible for maximizing the benefits organizations receive from their investments in technology. CompTIA is dedicated to advancing industry growth through its educational programs, market research, networking events, professional certifications, and public policy advocacy. To learn more, visit www.comptia.org, http://www.facebook.com/CompTIA and http://twitter.com/comptia.

Contact:
Steven Ostrowski
CompTIA
630-678-8468
smostrowski@comptia.org

Read More

Los Angeles Citywide Gigabit Fiber RFP: Is This the Future of Broadband in Urban America?

November 07, 2013  TechZone360

By Peter Bernstein , Senior Editor

There is an old saying in the U.S. that if you want to know what the future is going to look like, technologically as well as culturally, start with what is going on in California. And, while the Twitter IPO has captured the imagination of investors and content creators, and tech pubs constantly focus on the likes of Google, Apple, Facebook and their Silicon Valley neighbors, it might behoove everyone to take a hard and sustained look at what is going on in Southern California – Los Angeles to be precise.

In case you missed it, and my colleague Steve Anderson has done a nice job covering it, this week the Los Angeles City Council decided by a unanimous vote to set in motion the creation of a Request For Proposals (RFP), whose end game is the selection of a vendor to deploy a citywide fiber-to-the-home (FTTH) network to bring gigabit high-speed broadband service all 3.5 million residents and business within the city proper.

The RFP is expected to be issued in December. Responses, for the network whose initial cost for deployment is pegged at $3 billion to $5 billion, would be due back in March 2014.

Los Angeles says it has no intention of paying for the project, but has promised the winning bidder/bidders (a consortium appears to be acceptable) that the city will get rid of the red tape in the permitting and inspections processes. In return, the city will require the winning entity to open up wholesale access to the network to multiple providers so they can compete in provider value-added services. In addition, part of the plan would include free Wi-Fi access between 2 Mbps and 5 Mbps in certain public areas. Residents and businesses will have to pay for their own broadband subscriptions, which may include phone and TV service. There is also the expectations that the winning bidder will be expected to make donations of home broadband equipment to nonprofits to distribute to those who might not be able to afford it.


Image via Shutterstock

To put all of this is lay terms, LA understands that it economic vitality going forward is directly (pardon the play words) linked to the city having universally accessible and affordable broadband. In short, it is a modern version of the Communications Act of 1934, which created the FCC with a mission to do exactly what is envisioned here. And, as with the history of communications under the 1934 Act as amended and interpreted over time, the goal is to in essence make broadband access a right rather than a privilege under a regime where a franchise is granted in exchange for the regulatory jurisdiction have a major say in pricing and on the terms and conditions for encouraging competition.

On the latter front, as has been widely quoted in various news outlets, Los Angeles Information Technology Agency GM Steve Reneker told Arstechnica, “We're not looking at trying to be monopolistic and try to force anybody out of the market.”

Reaction thus far has ranged from this is the future to it is a boondoggle in the making. My own opinion is that while it certainly is going to be a wake-up call to current network service providers in Los Angeles—including Time-Warner, Cox, Charter, and AT&T—I am hopeful of a modified outcome which the RFP has a chance of setting in motion. Let me explain.

Ever since the breakup of the old AT&T in the mid-1980s I have been on record as saying that if the physical landline network operators were smart they would divest themselves of their outside plant and concentrate on becoming what we now call Over-the-Top (OTT) value-added service providers. Why communities of all sizes need two or more entities digging up streets has always escaped me on a host of fronts not the least of which is economic efficiencies. The deregulation of the electric utility business in the U.S. is a good example of this, and the physical plant that delivers communications services should be viewed as originally intended as a true utility service.

The nice thing about awarding provisioning of fiber as a utility service by a single entity, including the expansion of what would be free basic Wi-Fi services, is that regulators would have a less arduous task on a multitude of fronts. So long as there is equal access and equal interconnection (something the FCC and states have struggled with for decades) provided to qualified competitors the local entity would be in a position as overseer to assure the outside plant utility was not price gauging end users or value-added service providers and was meeting all public safety and operational metrics it proscribed.

There are a few things to highlight under such a scenario.

First, the single physical fiber network provider should be precluded from offering value-added services. It is asking for trouble. The challenge for regulators going back to the beginning of competition in the communications industry in the early 1970s has been figuring out how to let the monopoly regulated entities compete in unregulated markets on a fair basis. To be kind, they have done less than a wonderful job as technology innovation and the markets have moved a lot faster than the rules.

Second, a single entity under strict terms and conditions for deploying fiber to everyone everywhere, would be able to use the divested assets of current providers. The idea of reinventing the wheel seems counter-intuitive, especially in urban areas where broadband competition has caused fiber to be deployed to most if not all areas albeit not necessarily to residential customer premises.

I know this is going to come as a shock to my friends who are providing VDSL2 solutions that extend the life of copper by offering what are today broadband speeds, but having a single fiber utility with the responsibility universally fiber to the home and business for cities looking to gain competitive advantage long-term is less attractive than getting fiber in faster. Indeed, whether it is in Europe or Asia Pacific, counties and entire regions recognize the importance of accelerating the deployment of next-generation speeds and feeds, and the U.S. already lags several countries in terms of the average speeds we provide the average citizen and small business.

What the Internet revolution has spawned was a radical shift in value. It used to be that value in communications was a direct function of owning the network connection because it meant you owned the customer. What the Internet has done is said that owning the servers, applications and content that customers want is where premium value is to be extracted.

A good argument can be made that just being in the “dumb pipe” business is actually a good business. In fact, Google’s fiber efforts may prove this out assuming there is a watchful eye on Google using its myriad of online services in untoward ways. The fact is that Google may just be testing the waters to force others to accelerate fiber deployment. It is hard to imagine they have ambitions of fibering all of the top SMSA in the U.S.

Finally, for years the attraction of U.S. municipalities being service providers has been tantalizing. The problem, including Los Angeles interest in providing its own free Wi-Fi service, has been intense pushback from incumbent suppliers who see value in their franchises and the correct assumption that this is not an activity that government can and should be engaged in. That said, really good oversight, including protections for consumers and those who wish to use facilities to provide value-added services is a role government can play.

The reason to pay attention to what is going on in LA thus is not whether there is an RFP or whether the envisioned network under it gets built. We have entered a watershed period in the history of the converging broadly defined communications and adjacent industries, and industry restructuring is picking up speed in accordance with the roiling changes being driven by technology and consumer expectations. It is why I am hopeful the unintended consequence of the RFP lead to a future whose goal is the same as the intended consequences, but that the road taken is a cost-effective and more efficient short-cut as to how to get from here to there.

Is Los Angeles the future of urban broadband services delivery? It very well could be, and the next several months will be telling.


Edited by Alisen Downey

Read More

ICT jobs in California ripe for the picking

November 01, 2013 by Matthew Grant Anson  California Economic Summit



(photo credit: Mike Poresky)

Mike Rowe knows a thing or two about skilled work. For a decade he’s jumped headfirst into all sorts of skill-heavy modes of employment for Dirty Jobs, and his time embracing the dirty has resulted in some economic wisdom.

“The thing I hear over and over and over and over again from small business owners and entrepreneurs is how hard it is to find workers with the combination of the right skills and willingness to work their butts off,” he told Inside Edition back in August.

Although Rowe was talking about skilled workers like mechanics and plumbers, this quote rings just as true in the field of Information Communication Technology (ICT). The rapid growth of the ICT field is the California economy’s best kept secret, but the California Workforce Association and the California Workforce Investment Board are looking to change that.

The first step in getting the word out was an October 30th webinar, which was the first of many bringing together economic big-shots from across the state to talk about what ICT is and how the skills involved will be the lifeblood of the California economy for years to come.

“We’re living in a changed world today,” said James Jones, executive director of the Mid-Pacific ICT Center. “Twentieth century economies were dominated by transportation and energy and manufacturing, while 21st century economies are increasingly dominated by information knowledge and innovation. ICT’s a paradigm shift that a lot of people have not yet gotten their heads around.”

First, a bit of clarification: The difference between ICT and IT is virtually negligible. They are mostly interchangeable, but while IT is a somewhat generic term, ICT stresses “the role of unified communications and the integration of telecommunications.” What’s important, however, is that these jobs in computers, software, and programming are exploding in a way that benefits the economy at large.

“ICT workers were responsible for 75 percent of US productivity growth from 1995 to 2002, and its workers contribute three to five times more productivity than non-ITC workers,” Jones said. “From 2001 to 2011, ICT jobs increased by 22.2 percent. [The sector] grew 95 times faster than employment as a whole, and its workers earn 74 percent more than the average worker.”

And therein lies the problem: the jobs are there, but there aren’t enough bodies to fill them. Despite the fact that each ICT job creates 4.3 more in the economy and ICT workers earn double the median wage in California, over half the companies in California report difficulty finding appropriately skilled ICT workers.

“That’s completely messed up in this period of high unemployment,” Jones said. “The situation is going to get worse because a large proportion of the existing ITC workforce is getting ready to retire.” Translation: it’s already hard to fill these jobs now, and the situation for employers is about to get worse. If people were properly trained, the unemployment rate would likely plummet in the coming years at the hands of the ICT sector alone.

So, how well is California getting its citizens trained for a chance at one of these jobs? The answer is troubling. San Francisco and the Bay Area at large may be the fastest growing ICT job market in the US, but 50 percent of the high schools there do not offer a single ICT-related class option for students.

Additionally, what is offered in California is far from standardized, as what is considered compulsory teaching in one program may not be in another. Jones stressed that 3 out 4 employers say a common training framework for ICT education is paramount.

Tim Rainey, executive director of the California Workforce Investment board, put the litany of data and figures into some context. “We’re in a retraining economy,” he said. “To be successful today, people need to have broad-based and employable skills. It no longer works to train people for a specific job or occupation.”

It’s simple wisdom – diversify and thrive – but that’s what makes it powerful. The California Economic Summit has made creating the next-generation workforce one of its seven Signature Initiatives. The Workforce Action Team will emphasize careers in high-demand fields through CTE partnerships and STEM career pathways.

Moving California forward isn’t just about creating new industries, but taking advantage of the opportunities in ones that are already here. That’s why California Forward, in partnership with the California Stewardship Network, is going all in on the California Economic Summit. Just one week away (!), the Summit will set an economic path down which California can move fluidly and confidently.

Read More

Study: U.S. Cities Pay More Money For Less Broadband

by Karl Bode 09:40AM Monday Oct 28 2013 DSLReports

 

A new study by the New America Foundation has found that United States fixed and wireless urban broadband customers pay significantly more for less bandwidth than their overseas counterparts. The report compared fixed and wireless broadband pricing in most of the largest United States cities to international cities such as London, Berlin, Bucharest and Zurich.

Though the United States is ranked near the bottom on price in most categories (with little to no movement year to year), the comparisons are particularly stark when it comes to triple play pricing, with no United States city even in the rankings until Bristol, Virginia shows up at 32.

"....In larger US cities, we continue to observe higher prices for slower speeds," notes the study. "In the US for example, the best deal for a 150Mbps home broadband connection from cable and phone companies is $130/month, offered by Verizon FiOS in limited parts of New York City. By contrast, the international cities we surveyed offer comparable speeds for $77 or less per month, with most coming in at about $50/month."

Things don't get much prettier when it comes to wireless pricing, notes the report.

"When it comes to mobile broadband, the cheapest price for around 2GB of data in the US ($30/month from T-Mobile) is twice as much as what users in London pay ($15/month from T-Mobile). It costs more to purchase 2GB of data in a US city than it does in any of the cities surveyed in Europe."

The report's solution shouldn't be surprising if you've been paying attention (or if you recall Google is a major funder).

"Rather than allowing American cities to fall behind, policymakers should reassess current policy approaches and implement strategies to increase competition, in turn fostering faster speeds and more affordable access."

Read More

Google Offers $35 Chromecast Streaming Video Device

by Karl Bode Thursday 25-Jul-2013

 

In addition to unveiling their latest Nexus 7 tablet, Google yesterday turned heads with the release of Chromecast, a $35 device that plugs into a television's HDMI port and allows users to stream content from their phone, tablet or PC directly to their television. According to the Google blog announcement, the device works with Netflix, YouTube, Google Play Movies & TV, and Google Play Music, with more services on the way.

The device is already on sale over at Amazon, where quite amusingly it already has 42 user reviews despite the fact nobody has really used it yet.

Read More

OECD: U.S. Ranks in Middle of Global Broadband Pack

7/23/13 at 12:24 PM by Joan Engebretson  telecompetitor

Has U.S. broadband subscriber growth stalled?


The U.S. ranked near the middle of 34 developed and developing nations measured by the number of wired broadband subscriptions per 100 inhabitants, according to new research from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. The OECD is an international organization that promotes policies aimed at improving the economic and social well-being of people around the world.

The U.S. has about 28.8 broadband subscribers per 100 inhabitants, according to the OECD, giving the country a ranking of 15 out of 34 OECD nations, behind 12 European countries, Canada and Korea. The top 5 countries were Switzerland, Netherlands, Denmark, Korea and France, all of which had at least 36 broadband subscribers per 100 inhabitants. Data was collected as of year-end 2012.

The U.S. saw an increase of 1.5% in broadband subscribers per 100 inhabitants between June 2012 and December 2012, ranking it in the middle of the pack there, too. Thirteen European countries, Mexico and Chile saw greater growth. Mexico topped the list with a 5.2% increase in broadband subscriptions per 100 inhabitants in the six-month study period, followed by Greece, Poland, Slovak Republic and Portugal. All of those countries had six-month growth rates of at least 3.9%.

In looking at broadband connectivity per 100 inhabitants, the OECD also collected data about the type of technology used – and there was considerable variation from one country to another. While the U.S. and Canada had more cable than DSL subscribers, DSL subscriptions outnumbered cable subscriptions in most other countries. Meanwhile Asian countries Korea and Japan had the highest percentage of broadband subscribers using fiber. Both countries have more subscribers on fiber than on all other broadband technologies combined.



Several European countries also have relatively high percentages of total broadband subscribers on fiber. Sweden, Estonia and Slovak Republic had between 30% and 40% of total broadband subscribers using fiber.

In the U.S. that percentage was 7.4%, giving the U.S. a ranking of 21 out 34 OECD countries.

Read More

Akamai: Average Internet speed up 17% year-over-year to finally pass 3 Mbps, while mobile data traffic doubled

By Emil Protalinski Tuesday, 23 Jul '13, 12:30pm, The Next Web


For the first time, global average connection speeds have surpassed the 3 Mbps mark. Meanwhile, the demands of the mobile world are growing very fast, with data traffic doubling in the last year. The latest figures come from Akamai, which today published its quarterly State of the Internet report for Q1 2013.

As always, the firm took a look at global network connectivity and connection speeds, broadband adoption and availability, as well as security. The biggest news, however, is that between Q4 2012 and Q1 2013, the global average connection speed rose 4 percent from 2.9 Mbps to 3.1 Mbps, or 17 percent year-over-year.

Akamai listed 123 countries/regions as experiencing an increase in average connection speeds year-over-year, ranging from 1.4 percent in Oman to 122 percent in Iraq. 117 of them saw their average connection speeds increase this past quarter, ranging from 0.7 percent in Kuwait to 75 percent in Guatemala.

As you can see, eight of the top 10 countries/regions saw double-digit percentage growth year-over-year:



“This quarter’s State of the Internet Report shows continued positive growth in terms of Internet and broadband adoption worldwide,” David Belson, the report’s editor, said in a statement. “We have seen overall increases in average and peak connection speeds along with greater broadband penetration on both a quarterly and annual basis.”

Global broadband adoption, which Akamai rates as speeds of 4Mbps and up, increased 5.8 percent last quarter to reach 46 percent. Global high broadband, rated as 10 Mbps and up, reached 13 percent thanks to a 10 percent increase over the previous quarter.

Despite all this, mobile is where all the interest really lies. Akamai cited data collected by Ericsson, which has a presence in more than 180 countries and a customer base representing more than 1,000 networks, that indicated the volume of mobile data traffic doubled from Q1 2012 to Q1 2013, and grew 19 percent between Q4 2012 and Q1 2013:



As you can see, mobile voice traffic continues to increase as well, though at a slower rate of 4 percent growth quarter-over-quarter. A further breakdown of streaming and browsing would be rather interesting, we think.

In Q1 2013, average connection speeds on surveyed mobile network operators ranged from a low of 0.4 Mbps to a high of 8.6 Mbps. Only nine operators demonstrated average connection speeds in the aforementioned broadband category while 64 more operators showed average connection speeds above 1 Mbps.

In the not-so-distant future, we’d expect mobile speeds to start accelerating. As the number of mobile users continues to explode, so should competition for these potential customers.

Check out the full report for yourself here:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/155497912/Akamai-Q1-2013-State-of-the-Internet-Report

Read More

Forget fiber! Gigabit-boosted DSL standard could be ready next year

Loek Essers, Jul 16, 2013 8:44 AM, PCWorld


A broadband standard that aims to support bandwidth-intensive applications such as streaming Ultra-HDTV movies without the need to install fiber between the distribution point and people’s homes met its first-stage approval, the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) said on Tuesday.

The broadband standard is called G.fast and promises up to 1Gbps over existing copper telephone wires. The standard is designed to deliver super-fast downloads over a distance of 250 meters, eliminating the expense of fiber cables to peoples’ homes, the ITU said in a news release.

G.fast passed the first-stage approval of the ITU standard that specifies methods to minimize the risk of G.fast equipment interfering with broadcast services such as FM radio, the ITU said. If all goes well, G.fast will be approved in early 2014, it added.
Faster networks are needed to smoothly handle 4K resolution TV signals.

The standard is expected to be deployed by service providers that want to offer Fiber to the Home-like services, the ITU said. G.fast is meant to enable flexible upstream and downstream speeds to support bandwidth-intensive applications such as uploading high-resolution video and photo libraries to cloud-based storage, and communicating via HD video, it said.

Users should be able to install G.fast themselves without assistance, according to the ITU. Self-installing eliminates further costs service providers or consumers would have to pay for technicians, which will improve the speed of new services rollout, it said.

G.fast was tested by Alcatel-Lucent and Telekom Austria at the beginning of July. During that trial, a maximum speed of 1.1Gbps was achieved over 70 meters and 800Mbps over 100 meters over a single cable.

Consumers could be expecting the first G.fast connections to be available as of 2015, estimated Frank van der Putten, manager of Fixed Access Standards & Regulatory at Alcatel-Lucent and ITU rapporteur in a YouTube video.

Read More

Netflix Releases ISP Streaming Rankings For June

Google Fiber, Cablevision Continue to Top Rankings

by Karl Bode Broadband Reports

Earlier this year Netflix began ranking the quality of video streaming performance for each of the nation's largest ISPs. HD streams have variable bitrate but can potentially top out at around 4800 kilobits per second, and the data, gleaned from 36 million Netflix members who view over 1 billion hours of TV shows, provides a bird's eye view by ISP of sustained throughput available from a given ISP over time.




Netflix just released their latest ISP rankings for June and by and large they're unchanged, with Google Fiber in the top spot, Cablevision's Optimum Online in the second spot, and various DSL operators continuing to flouder around the bottom half of the rankings. AT&T's U-Verse in particular continues a fairly poor showing, dropping a spot to tenth in the rankings.

ISPs which in the past had historically improved in Netflix performance because of faster speeds, have the last few months found themselves falling because they're not signing up for Netflix's CDN network. As noted earlier this year, Netflix stated they'd start offering users "Super HD" and 3D streams -- if their ISP signed up for Netflix's new Open Connect Content Delivery Network.

As expected many bigger ISPs, most of whom have had neutrality fights with Netflix previously, have not agreed to Netflix's demand for special CDN treatment (AT&T, Comcast, Verizon, Time Warner Cable, Charter, Brighthouse, etc) and are dropping more and more in the Netflix ratings each month.

ISPs who agreed to sign up (Cablevision, Suddenlink, and obviously Cox) have seen miraculously huge gains. ISPs like Comcast and FiOS have even seen their overall average delivery speeds rise, yet because they've balked at Netflix's proposal have fallen to eighth and sixth place, respectively. Verizon's FiOS had a particularly hard month due to a peering fight with Cogent that resulted in lower performance, though that didn't appear to factor into last month's ratings.

Read More

Gigabit Squared Unveils Residential Pricing for Local Ultra-High-Speed Fiber Network Service in Seattle

GB2Seattle

SEATTLE (June 24, 2013) – Gigabit Squared today unveiled residential pricing for the ultra-high-speed fiber-to-the-home broadband network it plans to launch locally in 2014. The Gigabit Squared fiber network will initially be made available to neighborhoods located within the University of Washington West Campus District, First Hill, Capitol Hill and Central Area of Seattle as part of a program called Gigabit Seattle.

“We are excited about the limitless possibilities our network can bring to the residents located in these areas and are confident that the affordability and high speed performance of our fiber network will be well received,” said Mark Ansboury, president of Gigabit Squared. He added, “We will be providing our customers with significantly greater speed and accessibility than what’s out there today for about the same price…a true value. This will be backed by a level of customer service that will surpass anything anyone has ever experienced before.”

Gigabit Squared’s fiber broadband services will be 50 to 1,000 times faster than typical cable modem or DSL Internet access services. Unlike most Internet access services, Gigabit Squared’s offerings will be symmetrical (equal upstream and downstream data rates) to enable interactive services that require two-way sharing of video, audio, images, and other large files in real time.

“We’re one step closer to bringing gigabit speed broadband to Seattle,” said Mayor Mike McGinn. “We are leveraging our new public-private partnership with the University of Washington and Gigabit Squared to help Seattle compete in the global economy. I’m excited to see how our residents and businesses can innovate with this new infrastructure.”

Gigabit Squared’s simplified fiber network pricing plans for Seattle will be structured as follows:

1. Installation Charge:  Installation charges will be waived for customers signing a one-year contract for 100 Mbps service or greater.  Otherwise, a $350 installation fee is required.
2. Service Plan Options:

Plan A:

• 5 Mbps download/1 Mbps upload: No charge for 60 months
• 5/1 Mbps services are transferrable to new renters or owners
• After 60 months renters or owners can convert to a 10 Mbps download/10 Mbps upload service plan for only $10 per month

Plan B:

• 100 Mbps download/100 Mbps upload for $45 per month
• No installation charge with one- year contract

Plan C:

• 1000 download/1000 upload Mbps for $80 per month
• No installation charge with one-year contract

Since the launch of the Gigabit Seattle website in December, thousands of Seattle residents have already expressed an interest in the service. Ansboury commented, “We will be announcing a simple sign-up process next month that will make it easy for people to sign up for the service that best meets their individual needs. This will help us prioritize the neighborhood rollout schedule. We can’t wait to make this available to as many residents as possible and look forward to our initial program’s success so we can quickly expand into other areas of Seattle.”

About Gigabit Squared
Gigabit Squared helps people experience a better quality of life by connecting them to an unconstrained gateway of information, people and services. We do this by providing superior digital products and services that enable people and communities to sustainably grow and prosper together.
We are a digital economic development corporation specializing in the planning, implementation and rollout of IT-enabled infrastructure in core markets across the USA. The Gigabit Squared team has been responsible for developing and acquiring large-scale infrastructure projects through government, quasi-government, private, and non-profit sources. Visit us online to learn more at www.gigabitsquared.com and Gigabit Seattle at www.gigabitseattle.com.

- See more at: http://gigabitseattle.com/gigabit-squared-unveils-residential-pricing-for-local-ultra-high-speed-fiber-network-service-in-seattle/#sthash.Vly2X0eU.dpuf

Read More

"President Obama's Plan to 'Connect' America's Youth to the Future"

 Politic365





President Calls for 99 percent of U.S. Students to be Outfitted with High-Speed Broadband by 2018

By Thomas Dortch, Founder and Chairman, National Black College Alumni Hall of Fame Foundation, Inc.

For those of us who graduated more than a few years ago, this may come as a surprise, but high-speed Internet service is now an essential educational tool for students from Tuscaloosa, AL to Pullman, WA. A recent report by the Pew Research Center confirms that 76 percent of teachers now require at least some homework be completed online. This can pose a challenge to students who don’t have high-speed Internet access at home.

Pew researchers report that middle and high school teachers estimate that only 18 percent of their students have sufficient access to necessary Internet and digital tools in their homes. Additionally, a 2011 FCC study found that over 80 percent of schools and libraries consider their current broadband service—both speed and capacity—to be inadequate. However, President Obama has a plan and is working with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to implement it nationwide.

Last week at Mooresville Middle School in North Carolina, President Obama unveiled his ‘ConnectED’ initiative for outfitting America’s classrooms with 21st century broadband service. He called on the FCC to modernize an existing program and to expand lightning-fast broadband connectivity to reach more students in more areas. Through his “ConnectED” initiative, the President hopes to bring next-generation Internet access to 99 percent of K–12 students within five years.

As chairman of the National Black College Alumni Hall of Fame Foundation, an organization that works to implement educational programs that ensure the success of our nation’s future leaders, I applaud the President’s efforts to expand access to this vital educational tool. Many minority students still struggle to reach college, and expanded access to high-speed broadband will help all students better prepare for college, and for all of their educational endeavors. With reliable, fast Internet service, students can easily access distance learning and online Advanced Placement courses, and homework help is just a click away. More importantly, this educational tool has the power to motivate and stimulate students by making learning more accessible and fun. High-speed Internet service can also help students find information about scholarships, college fairs, and opportunities available to them through organizations like the Hall of Fame.

But President Obama’s plan to expand Internet access should be only a first step: Certainly we must make sure that our classrooms are outfitted with this essential service, but students aren’t the only ones who need access to 21st century broadband. After all, learning doesn’t end with high school graduation, and broadband access can deliver opportunities and new possibilities to all people and to all communities.

Broadband access is an essential tool for success in our digital age. A modern, fast broadband connection allows people to access news and information, find jobs, and discover training or higher education opportunities. People from all walks of life can benefit from a reliable, fast connection that delivers exciting and useful possibilities for social and professional networking, lifelong learning, and civic engagement. For entrepreneurs or small businesses, high-speed broadband offers a chance to compete, to expand, and to connect with resources or customers from all around the world. This technology also offers numerous possibilities for better health and wellness, economic growth and stability, improved quality of life, and equality of opportunity.

Our government must work to ensure that all people can access the possibilities that these networks afford. The availability of an expanded, next-generation broadband infrastructure—able to deliver the services, capabilities, and speeds of tomorrow—will make new things possible for our nation. Expanding and upgrading our country’s broadband networks, both wireline and wireless, will encourage economic growth and job creation as well as help secure America’s global leadership position. Additionally, enhanced and expanded broadband networks can support important national programs and initiatives, including ConnectED.

Accelerating the transition to enhanced, expanded broadband networks will require updated regulations tailored to 21st century technologies. Modernizing these rules will fuel innovation and encourage broadband providers to increase their already significant investment into the broadband infrastructure and our economy. Our government must also ensure that the upcoming spectrum auction is fair and open, and that all qualified bidders have equal opportunity to acquire the necessary airwaves for expanding their wireless networks.

It’s time to get serious about increasing everyone’s access to opportunities. Advanced, next-generation broadband connectivity is a critical educational tool for our students, but it is also an essential tool that can help all people accomplish goals and achieve successes. Expanding access to upgraded, 21st century networks will help our country and our youth meet and exceed the challenges of tomorrow.

Read More

Verizon's Wireless 'Voice Link' as a Replacement of the Wires? The Downgrading and Disconnecting of America's Communications Networks

Bruce Kushnick

Executive Director, New Networks Institute

Huffington Post

Imagine waking up after a storm and your wired phone line is dead. You've kept it because the cell phone service isn't reliable or sounds like you are under water. Maybe you really wanted something more reliable in case of an emergency. You check and the burglar alarm isn't working either. You go to your home office and find that the DSL line is out as well.

You walk over to your neighbor's house and their services are also out. You call the phone company and they ask you to 'leave a message'. You keep calling and they tell you that they are not going to fix any of your services; they offer to give you a wireless replacement called Voice Link.

Then they inform you that it can't do DSL, the burglar alarm won't be fixed and they are not liable if your E911 service doesn't work.

Welcome to the future of telecommunications in the U.S.

Last week, Verizon filed with the FCC to be able to replace the existing copper wire with a wireless box called "Voice Link." Verizon has already notified communities in New York, such as Fire Island, and New Jersey, including the town of Mantoloking -- who have been out of service since the Sandy storm, (now six months and counting), that they are not planning on fixing the copper wires.

As we noted elsewhere, there have been customers in the middle of Manhattan, New York City, as well as other parts of the Big Apple who have been out of service since Sandy, and this includes both residential customers as well as small business customers.

However, this is just a tip of a very large iceberg. Verizon has been testing Voice Link in Florida and while Verizon claims this is just a fix for unfixable copper lines, according to the unions Verizon is planning a national campaign to not fix the wires throughout the Verizon territories, intending to push people onto wireless if they call about trouble on the line.

Voice Link is supposed to have been a temporary fix but is now a permanent downgrade.
And this is part of a much larger plan Verizon and AT&T have put into motion to 'abandon' whole areas of the U.S. and force them onto their wireless service -- or not get service. I'll get back to that.

Voice Link Stinks: It Can Not do Basic Data Applications or Provide Reliable E911

Voice Link is like a cell phone from a decade ago -- before there was 'data'. Voice Link is a box put into the home with an antenna, but it can not do almost any data application that is part of the traditional utility-based phone network, commonly called the "PSTN", Public Switched Telephone Networks, or sometimes referred to as "POTS", Plain Old Telephone Service.

Click here to see a comparison of POTS vs. Voice Link.

According to the Verizon Voice Link® Terms of Service, the service can't do basic data applications, including fax or credit card handling or DSL (broadband) or even dial-up Internet service using a modem and a phone line. It can't do medical alert services, it can't do alarm company services and it doesn't let you use a calling card to make cheap calls.

Verizon writes:


"The Service is not compatible with fax machines, DVR services, credit card machines, or some High Speed or DSL Internet services,

The Service is not compatible with medical alert or other monitoring services.

The Device may not be compatible with certain monitored home security systems.

The Service does not allow the Customer to make 500, 700, 900, 950, 976, 0, 00, 01, 0+, calling card or dial-around calls (e.g., 10-10-XXXX).

The Service does not allow the Customer to accept collect calls or third number billed calls.

The Company will not bill any charges on behalf of other carriers. You must have an International Calling Plan in order to make international calls."




And this impacts lots of different customers, from the small business whose fax, DSL and credit card processing no longer works to the home alarm or grandma's home alert service. Even services for the disabled, like deaf-relay, may not work.

No Reliable Emergency E911 Service. Many people keep their land line for emergencies. Verizon claims that "Voice Link offers the same E911 capabilities as traditional wireline service."

And yet, Verizon refuses to take any liability in case the E911 emergency services don't work. Verizon's terms of service states that the E911 call may not go through and the E911 dispatcher may not be able to identify your location based on your phone number, which is standard for all wireline-based E911 service phone lines. Here's a snippet:
"Additional Service Limitations that Apply in the Event that Verizon Cannot Route Your 911 Call Directly to the Appropriate Emergency Service Provider. If, for any reason, Verizon cannot directly route your 911 call to the appropriate emergency service provider, your 911 call may be routed to a Verizon operator. You agree that the operator and/or emergency response center personnel receiving your call may not be able to identify your phone number or the physical address from which you are calling."

The Downgrading & Disconnection of America

Since 2010, Verizon and AT&T have both announced that they are 'abandoning' the copper networks -- i.e. they have stopped upgrading massive areas where they offer phone service and decline to fix the wires, forcing customers onto wireless -- or have them leave.

In AT&T's FCC petition to start the 'transition' to close down the networks, AT&T's press release stated that at least 25% will be pushed onto wireless.


"In the 25 percent of AT&T's wireline customer locations where it's currently not economically feasible to build a competitive IP wireline network, the company said it will utilize its expanding 4G LTE wireless network -- as it becomes available -- to offer voice and high-speed IP Internet services."



Meanwhile, Verizon has also stopped upgrading their networks and they, too, are abandoning their un-upgraded customers. Stop the Cap's headline "Verizon's Long Term Plan to Abandon Wired Landlines/Broadband in Non-FiOS Areas Begins" says it all.

And this is not new. A year ago Verizon stated it would supply their rural areas with 'Home Fusion", commonly called Cantenna' an expensive wireless broadband service. As we noted, Cantenna does not substitute for DSL or Verizon's FiOS as it has bandwidth usage pricing as compared to DSL, which is a flat rate (at least so far).

Remove "Carrier of Last Resort" Thanks to AT&T and ALEC.

But it gets worse. In some states, if your service goes out and there isn't another service to use as a replacement -- tough.

As we wrote, AT&T and the other phone and cable companies, working with a group called the American Legislative Exchange Council, ALEC, were able to create model legislation and get ALEC-politician members to push deregulatory legislation through their state legislatures to remove basic customer safeguards such as requiring quality of service standards -- including fixing services after a storm -- or worse, removing the 'carrier of last resort' obligations which require the incumbent utility phone company to supply service to everyone in their territory.

According to NRRI, 25 states have removed some, if not all oversight and regulations on phone service and have passed laws to remove basic obligations like carrier of last resort.

This same model legislation has been used by AT&T as the basis for its FCC petition which requests the FCC to 'sunset', meaning closes down, the utility networks -- the copper networks. The irony is thick as AT&T's entire U-Verse broadband and cable service is based on these same old copper wires. Thus, for AT&T is simply drawing a line in the sand as to who gets and does not get upgraded or who gets service or who doesn't.

One has to wonder whether these draconian laws that have passed will stand up to the screams of customers once a major storm hits their area and the lines go down.

Will Voice Link Start Ringing Some Bells?

Mantoloking and other parts of New Jersey are not going to have their copper wire fixed. But there's a wrinkle -- Verizon had previous state obligations to upgrade the state to fiber optic services and Mantoloking, like the rest of New Jersey, should have had that copper wiring replaced before the storm... oops.

As we wrote, two small towns in New Jersey -- Stow Creek and Greenwich -- were suffering from continuous outages of their basic phone service and they were never upgraded to fiber optics. Verizon, New Jersey had obligations to have 100 percent of the state's utility network upgraded with a fiber optic wire capable of 45 Mbps in both directions, replacing the aging copper networks and to be completed by the year 2010.

Back in 1993, state laws were changed to give Verizon excess phone profits to pay for upgrading the old copper wiring -- and the law is still on the books. After a series of hearings, the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities issued a show cause order in 2012 to have Verizon explain why these towns had not been upgraded and to come up with a plan to make these customers whole.

We estimate that by the end of 2013, New Jersey phone customers paid about $15 billion for these upgrades -- as the excess monies have been collected for decades and is built into rates and in the profits of services, like Call Waiting.

Most of the AT&T and Verizon territories and states had similar agreements to upgrade the networks to fiber and though it varies by state, in New Jersey it would seem that Mantoloking and the other towns impacted by Sandy should have already been traveling at high speeds and not on the aging copper wires.

Will Voice Link and its downgrade of telecommunications capabilities in the U.S. trigger a call to investigate Verizon's failure to properly upgrade and maintain the utility networks -- even though they collected billions to do so? Will regulators and politicians ask why AT&T's entire 22 states are still based on copper? Or, how did 25 states remove basic obligations?

Will it take an act of God -- a tornado or a hurricane -- to wake up some states to the loss of customers' rights?

FYI: If you had Voice Link you couldn't read this online because it doesn't support DSL or even dial-up internet via a modem attached to a regular POTS phone line.

Read More

Video: Sunne Wright McPeak discusses digital divide with Christina Gagnier

By Techwire posted on March 20, 2013                

California Emerging Technology Fund President and CEO Sunne Wright McPeak sits down with Techwire Host Christina Gagnier to discuss California’s efforts to bridge the digital divide.

Read More

How AT&T Is Planning to Rob Americans of an Open Public Telco Network

Wired

• BY S. DEREK TURNER
• 02.28.13
• 6:30 AM

Photo: MrBill / Flickr

AT&T has a sneaky plan.

It wants to exploit a loophole in the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)’s rules to kill what remains of the public telecommunications network — and all of the consumer protections that go with it. It’s the final step in AT&T’s decade-long effort to end all telecommunications regulation, and the simplicity of the plan highlights a dysfunction unique to the American regulatory system.

AT&T and other big telecom carriers want to replace the portions of their networks that still use circuit-switching technology with equipment that uses Internet Protocol (IP) to route voice and data traffic. But because the FCC previously decided that it has no direct authority over communications networks that use IP, this otherwise routine technological upgrade could lead to a state of total deregulation.

S. Derek Turner

A telecommunications policy expert, S. Derek Turner is the research director at Free Press, a nonpartisan organization advocating for universal and affordable internet access, diverse media ownership, and vibrant public media. It officially opposes AT&T’s petition to the FCC.

We are already living with the consequences of the FCC IP decision: an uncompetitive broadband market. Our broadband providers enjoy the kinds of high profit margins that would make a 19th-century robber baron blush. And our ability to use these networks to communicate openly and freely is under constant assault. Meanwhile, consumers in other countries not only havebetter access, but they pay far less for far better services.

But there are large portions of the public telecom network that don’tuse IP, and that are still subject to varying degrees of regulatory oversight — including traditional landlines, alarm circuits, and many of the “special access” connections that carry voice and data traffic from cellular towers.

Now AT&T wants approval to convert all of this to an all-IP system. And because of the FCC’s flawed view of IP, this move would jettison all of the public interest protections that govern common carriers like AT&T. (The centuries-old “common carriage” concept applied to entities like railroads, shippers, and telecoms that transport goods often using public rights-of-way; since these functions are critical to commerce, common carriers are usually regulated even if they don’t operate in monopoly markets).

The immediate consumer impact of AT&T’s proposal would be swift and severe:

Higher prices. Remember what happened after California partially deregulated AT&T in 2006? The price of some basic voice services tripled. AT&T wants to make this happen everywhere. Also, the ability of many smaller wireless carriers to offer competitively priced services is based on specific regulations that prevent special access providers like AT&T and Verizon from charging exorbitant rates. These protections against monopoly prices will disappear if AT&T gets its way.

Service disruptions. Brinksmanship between AT&T and smaller wireless carriers that use the public network to transport their own traffic would lead to telecom blackouts. Just look at how cable customers are held hostage in carriage spats between cable providers and content owners. The rules that require carriers to get networks back online after outages would also be history if the FCC approves AT&T’s petition.

Inequality and discrimination. Seniors, low-income families, and rural residents — all of whom are more likely to rely on fixed-line voice services or dial-up internet access — would especially feel the pinch. Carriers that are now required to offer universal service will be free to redline poor neighborhoods and disconnect consumers at will. Elderly grandmothers living on fixed incomes rely on rate-regulated landlines to stay connected, but they need not worry: AT&T has an expensive wireless plan they can purchase instead.

It’s bad enough that we’re on the verge of losing all of the consumer protections that keep the price of basic voice service reasonable and ensure the most vulnerable stay connected. But by putting the last nail in the coffin of the public telecommunications network, AT&T’s plan poses an even greater threat to the future of American innovation and internet freedom.

This is because the internet itself would not exist if it were not for a delicate balance of public policies that made sure the public telecommunications network was an open platform: Anyone could use it as a building block for innovation.

Before the FCC adopted rules to keep the public network open, companies like AT&T were able toprohibit customers from using the network for anything other than what it approved. (We wouldn’t have been allowed to have answering machines, for example, if AT&T didn’t approve them.) Thanks to the FCC’s intervention then and continuing oversight, Bob Kahn and Vint Cerf didn’t need AT&T’s permission to connect computers. They simply used the public network as a platform to launch the IP technology that led to the internet we all use today.

When Congress updated the Communications Act in 1996, lawmakers reinforced this clear separation between devices on the edges of networks and the wires that connect them. And this approach worked: Consumers had choices for cheap long distance. There were dozens of dial-up ISPs, and even multiple options for DSL and cable modem service. Prices dropped, quality improved, and investment soared.

While the rest of the world followed this American blueprint to great success, our captive regulators dismantled the competitive framework, replacing it with nothing more than the vain hope the market would sort it all out. So it should come as no surprise that the rest of the world is busy undertaking itsown transition to all-IP networks without threatening the basic consumer protections that ensure universal access to essential communications services.

We stand at the edge of a cliff, and AT&T is eager to jump. It’s the FCC’s own bad decisions that led us to this cliff. But it’s not too late to step back. In updating its rules for an all-IP world, the FCC shouldn’t let the carriers kill off the public telecom network. We can protect consumer rights and free-market commerce without sacrificing the infrastructure’s open nature and its potential as a platform for innovation.

Read More

Phone rate hikes have landline customers ready to cut the cord

AT&T customers report increases of as much as 50% since 2011. And the firm is not alone. Verizon also has been raising basic service rates.

David Lazarus

February 12, 2013, Los Angeles Times

By Lane Kasselman, an AT&T spokesman, defended the latest price hikes by saying they “reflect changes in the marketplace.” Above, the company's headquarters in Detroit are shown in 2007.(Paul Sancya, Associated Press / January 25, 2007)

Joseph Aguon believes in preparing for the worst. So even though he makes most of his calls using a cellphone, he maintains a landline at his home in the Fairfax neighborhood — just in case an earthquake or storm knocked out wireless service.

But Aguon, 61, is finally ready to cut the cord, not because he's less mindful of potential disasters, but because AT&T keeps jacking up his rates.

I've heard from dozens of AT&T customers in recent weeks about big jumps in their bills for basic landlines and measured phone service, which provides customers with a fixed number of local calls each month.

Welcome to the exciting world of deregulation, where state officials allow phone companies to do as they please in hopes of encouraging a more competitive marketplace.

Quiz: How well do you remember 2012?

In Aguon's case, he paid about $20 for his landline in 2011. Last year, the cost rose 15% to $23. Now he's learned his monthly bill has climbed an additional 26% to $29.

That's a 45% rate hike in just two years. And did Aguon's service improve appreciably during that time?

"Not at all," he told me. "It's a landline. You call people. People call you. It's a landline."

Like Aguon, Peter Nardi, 65, maintains a landline at his Los Feliz home just to be on the safe side. His measured service plan cost $12 a month in 2011. It now runs $18.

"That's a 50% increase," Nardi said. "So I called AT&T to complain."

What did the company say?

"They apologized but said there was nothing they could do."

In fact, AT&T can do whatever it wants.

Since 2011, the California Public Utilities Commission has allowed phone companies to raise — or lower — basic phone rates whenever they choose, rather than seek approval from regulators. Since then, costs have steadily gone up.

Jarryd Gonzales, a Verizon spokesman, said the company raised its monthly rate $1.90 for basic phone service to $20.91 in 2010. He said the rate will climb again, to $22, next month.

"They're doing it because they can do it," said Bill Nusbaum, managing attorney for the Utility Reform Network, a San Francisco advocacy group. "The PUC has turned its back on the market."

That's not how AT&T would characterize things. Lane Kasselman, a company spokesman, defended the latest price hikes by saying they "reflect changes in the marketplace."

He said there's more competition for new wireless services such as phones you can plug into any outlet and access your home number. "Prices are going down for the products that people are moving to," Kasselman said.

Perhaps. But that doesn't justify higher prices for the products that people have had for decades. A 50% rate hike in just two years?

"That's not the right way to look at it," Kasselman replied. "You have to look at it from 1994. Our rates were frozen for 14 years."

Um, no. AT&T's and Verizon's rates were regulated for 14 years, meaning that state officials had to approve any price increases. If phone companies could make a reasonable case for why they needed to increase prices, they could do it.

According to the PUC's Division of Ratepayer Advocates, AT&T charged $10.69 a month statewide for its cheapest basic phone service in 1994. The rate remained unchanged until 2008, when it rose to $10.94 — and continued rising every year to $23 now.

Verizon charged $16.85 for basic phone service in 1994, climbing to $17.25 in 2008 and hitting $22 next month.

Talk about making up for lost price hikes: Since the middle of the Great Recession, AT&T has raised basic rates 115% and Verizon will have hiked them nearly 31% as of next month.

The fact that prices for landlines remained relatively stable under regulation reflects the fact that the companies were making a fair profit in officials' eyes. They certainly weren't losing any money offering these services.

Now that their regulatory leashes have been removed, all that extra revenue is just gravy.

Nearly a third of all U.S. households are now completely wireless, according to a government report released last year. That means 69 million adults and 27 million kids have cut the landline cord.

AT&T's landline revenue has fallen about 16.5% over the last four years. Verizon's landline revenue has dropped about 19%.

Yet even as the number of people with landlines steadily dwindles, Nusbaum at the Utility Reform Network said AT&T and Verizon are socking landline customers with ever-higher rates.

"They're basically funding other things and paying off debt on the backs of landline customers," he said.

The companies are also using higher landline prices to prod customers into going wireless and thus relieve AT&T and Verizon of the financial burden of investing in older networks, Nusbaum said.

If so, the effort seems to be working. Both Aguon and Nardi said they're planning to cancel their landlines because of the rate hikes.

Call that a win-win for the phone companies. If people stick with their landlines, AT&T and Verizon clean up with sky-high rates. If people switch to wireless, that's more business for the products the companies want to focus on.

"We think people have more choices than ever before," AT&T's Kasselman said.

Except they're of the damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't variety.

David Lazarus' column runs Tuesdays and Fridays. He also can be seen daily on KTLA-TV Channel 5 and followed on Twitter @Davidlaz. Send your tips or feedback to david.lazarus@latimes.com.

Read More