AT&T’s Network Woes: Time for the FTC to Step In?

March 16, 2009

The lingering, won’t-go-away question about whether or not AT&T’s wireless networks are up to snuff reached a bit of a critical mass this past weekend, first with a critical story in the New York Times that was followed by reports of iPhone Disconnectus at SXSW.

Though Ma Bell tried to soothe the interactive crowd’s Twitter explosion of contempt by adding more cell capacity in Austin, Om does a good job of asking the bigger question of what’s up with the network anyway, and wonders if making AT&T fess up or fix it is a job for the new FCC.

But as our non-typo headline suggests, maybe this is really a task for the Federal TRADE Commission, which regulates things like truth in advertising and false product claims. If you want some regulatory action in this calendar year, the FTC might be a better bet because it probably doesn’t need new regulations passed to start wondering in a very legal sense if saying things like “More Bars in More Places” isn’t worth the same protection or information the FTC provides about things like automobile undercoating.

As I have stated before, I am no lawyer. But there’s no shortage of legal talent at the FTC, including its new leader Jon Leibowitz, who is among those making noises about getting involved in the whole net neutrality/telco regulation debate, a tussle previously fought mainly on the FCC’s turf. Maybe a good place for the FTC to start poking around is with the wireless data networks, where in the U.S. there are billing and advertising norms that would never be accepted in other industries. Could you imagine going to buy meat or milk, and the only guidance you had was a sticker saying “our meat is the best,” or “the best milk ever,” with no way of knowing even what animal it came from or where those animals live?

An extreme and weak comparison, perhaps, but why do we allow wireless providers to sell a product without disclosing how much of it we actually can use, or where it might be most available? Why isn’t there regulation of some sort that forces providers to disclose exactly where cell towers are and how strong a signal might be in any given location — so that you can actually consume the service you are paying for?

Again, these are very broad thoughts and suggestions for tightening the focus are welcome. But given that incoming FCC chairman Julius Genachowski probably won’t take over until late spring or early summer, and only then might start talking about necessary new legislation or regulation, why not let the FTC take a stab right now at bringing some clarity to wireless networks by helping to eliminate the fuzzy advertising, weak claims of “it’s working” and bring some measurement to the process? Forget about net neutrality, let’s start with just getting customers what they pay for, or making providers live up to or change their advertising claims.


Drew & Declan on Net Neutrality Panel

November 7, 2008

I will have some more thoughts (and maybe some video) on the informative net neutrality panel from Thursday’s proceedings at the WCAI confab in San Jose. But in the meantime, you can read some excellent coverage from Drew Clark and Declan McCullagh, who both know there way around this topic and then some.

(Declan also takes some arty pictures. Nice!)

Drew also has a longer take on FCC chairman Kevin Martin’s motivations for getting all Googly and loving the white spaces between the channels. Also worth a read.


Comcast to the WiMax Rescue? So Says WSJ

March 26, 2008

With yet another “people familiar with the talks” sourcing, the Wall Street Journal is nevertheless reporting that Comcast and Time Warner Cable are now the latest sugar daddies lining up to save WiMax from the not-so-successful clutches of Sprint and Clearwire.

We’ll skip most of the details because we have heard such reports from this same reputable outlet before, and they haven’t materialized. Past rumored bacon-savers Intel and Google reappear here, though in this report Comcast is purportedly the leading funder, to the tune of $1 billion. Google, which seems more interested lately in talking about wireless networks instead of actually spending money on them, is reported to be in with a few hundred million.

We’ll believe all this when we see it, which may indeed happen next week in Vegas where Sprint CEO Dan Hesse is scheduled to give a keynote at the CTIA wireless show. Stay tuned!

(Even though he probably shouldn’t be up late at night blogging, Om nevertheless put together a nice compilation of WiMax posts here.)