NY Times: F.C.C. Begins Rewriting Rules on Delivery of the Internet

[La_Serpiente]

F.C.C. Begins Rewriting Rules on Delivery of the Internet

WASHINGTON, Feb. 12 — The Federal Communications Commission began writing new rules today that officials and industry experts said would profoundly alter both the way the Internet is delivered and used in homes and businesses.

In one set of proceedings, the commission began writing regulations to enable computer users to gain access to the Internet through electric power lines. Consumers will be able to plug their modems directly into the wall sockets just as they do with any garden variety appliance. Officials said the new rules, which are to be completed in the coming months, would enable utilities to offer an alternative to the cable and phone companies and provide an enormous possible benefit to rural communities that are served by the power grid but not by broadband providers.

In a second set of proceedings, commissioners began considering what rules ought to apply to companies offering Internet space and software to enable computer users to send and receive telephone calls.

A majority of the commissioners suggested that the new phone services should have significantly fewer regulatory burdens than traditional phone carriers. The agency also voted 4-to-1 to approve the application of a small Internet company, Pulver.com, asking that its service of providing computer-to-computer phone service not make it subject to the same regulations and access charges as the phone carriers.

more...

F.C.C. Begins Rewriting Rules on Delivery of the Internet

Free Registration Required

[tridim]

1. Internet over AC power lines??

That sound's impossible. If it is somehow possible, be very afraid.

[buckeye1]

4. It is.

Not mentioned in the article is the interference that it will cause and the corp. upheaval.

If you like Am radio,shortwave or you are a ham,this is deadly. Digital signals broadcast over exposed power lines will wreck havoc.

This will challenge the current telcom situation. The power providers have already monopolized,should they have this too?

They will claim "free telephone service" but why would it benefit them? We will pay even more for less.

This will only re-shuffle the bad situation that we now have. If this works, Baby bells and cable giants will rush to merge and buy up power corps.

More layoffs,more upheaval and plenty of unearned profits for insiders.

[KharmaTrain]

2. This Is A Good Thing...

This would enable internet connections virtually anywhere and inexpensively. The technology exists that all you would have to do is plug your puter into the outlet and away you go...no phonelines or cable. It's another form of competition, and that's not a bad thing, either. The Internet delivery sector is very vibrant and highly competitive right now, it's rare to see the FCC actually be on top of this.

Also, using the electrical grid for internet delivery would open the door to lots of "wifi" or non-computer devices that need access to the internet, such as radios (you could listen to Malloy on a special radio that looks like your standard radio but receives internet-based stations...or access to the massive data bases from GPS to organizing your MP3s.

Here is where deregulation is a good thing since it'll open a whole new sector of development...including desperately needed high tech openings.

[jmowreader]

3. No, this is a bad thing

Electric transmission lines aren't shielded. Piping RF down them would turn them into huge antennas with the capability of disrupting radio communications, especially shortwave transmissions.

[buckeye1]

5. Thanks.

This is bad news. Powell jr. likes it,condersider the past.

[buckeye1]

6. News Flash.

The hype of the '90s is over. Once bitten is twice shy. This idea is old. Only Powell's thrist for more money drives this.

This has nothing to do with GPS or"wifi". Where I live corps have spent alot of money installing cables in the street. They will not spend to link to your house. The power interface is what they want.

This is a capture of money poorly spent. If you think this is something that will help the consumer,I can only disagree.

[Karenina]

8. My kid forwarded me this link

but I'm a Luddite and it made my HEAD SPIN. I know you folks will comprehend it much better than I am able to.

http://www.againsttcpa.com/index.shtml

[mac2]

7. FCC about to steal the Internet from the people.

The Internet belongs to the people. We the tax payers funded the research and set it up (with VP Al Gore's push for research and funding...our dollars). They are going to "privitize" it. Nope..it's not for sale.

Our technology for the Internet has spread throught the world. We don't get paid back do we? Now...they don't even want to pay taxes or keep the money they make off of us here in the US.

Powell is trying to sell off the Internet for profit by corporations. We already pay a great deal for it. What nerve!!!

Powell has abused his power by representing corporations and not the people. We pay his salary; they don't.

Powell should be asked to step down. He was going to resign previously..but did not. He does not have the backing or the confidence of the people. He has shown over and over, he doesn't represent the people...even ignoring them.

Congress is the Legislative branch. They make the laws and policies. The administration agency FCC head are the Executive branch. He enforces the laws..that are already on the books not make new ones.

Powell has abused his power. He was not elected but selected and should not have this power to write laws.

This is something they have to do to quiet us and our flow of information. We will distribute news and information in the streets if we have to. We will not be silenced!!!

This administartion has discarded the Constitution. We should call them traitors.

[Snappy]

9. This Powell.

This guy is as decietful as his father is. Another reason we have to defeat the Neo Fascists.

[KharmaTrain]

10. Park The Black Helicopter For A Few Minutes

I never saw it written that the Internet is publicly-owned, it's developed into an entity that is beyond that point. Even if the government were to attempt to shut down sites, one can go off-shore (like the Gamblers & Porn). Also there are serious first ammendment issues on the Internet that haven't been tested in court, and those that have, have come out against the government (content regulation, taxing and so on). This genie is out of the bottle and trying to control or regulate it would take the government years to accomplish. And why? The large telcoms have poured millions into BOTH political parties purposely to keep the government out of this new source of customers and revenues. The term "censor" is like death to the internet providers...one reason that they have fought to dislose the indentities of their users.

Next, if there was tax money used in the development of the internet, that investment was made years, even decades ago...and much of it was funded by STATE and private universities and large coporations (defense contractors)...my bets are that very little of your or any other taxpayer money went into the infrastructure...especially what's in place now. The development in the 90's was purely private money...billions in new lines, routers and the development of a whole new telcom sector. There's still more bulding to go (this has NOTHING to do with the dot com mess) and this bill is to remove another means of transmission that could mean more companies fighting for your internet useage.

You open a can of worms, without realizing it, when you touch on the topic of taxes and the internet. That's where the government wants its grubbies. The question is it is fair for a "brick and mortar" business that has to pay taxes vs. online businesses that don't.

That said, I'm no fan of Powell and have long been a critic of the FCC being a wholely-owned subsidiary of the National Association Of Broadcasters and other special interest communications groups. I'm fully against further media consolidation (especially on our ALREADY codified "Public Airwaves") and the ruses the large corporations do to deceive the public in their "stewardship" of these airwaves. Again, another issue for another day.

I've seen the FCC sit on its hands in the past when its come to establishing technical standards (anyone remember AM Stereo?) or attempt to "regulate" growth...with terrible results every time. Yes, I am against Powell and his ilk in turning our airwaves into a large commodities market and playground or a handful of large, well-connected corporations, but that's not the internet...especially content.

Right now the large media conglomerates still haven't found a way to turn serious coin with the internet...other than owning "access"...your ISP is probably owned by a large telcom...but the content is still very private and diverse.

This is not silencing anyone...it's providing MORE access. To the person who said it's techically impossible to transmit the internet on the electrical grid doesn't know how DSL works or that there have been home networks and other inter-connection systems using electrical wiring.

Right now there are millions who aren't able to access the internet since they can't afford it. Adding a fourth means of distribution (dial-up, DSL, Cable & now Electrical) provides another "pipeline" that will open up more voices to the internet, not stiffle them.

If you're gonna be paranoid about the FCC, let's investigate how to re-institute broadcast ownership rules or look into the regulation of cable...area that are directly under FCC control, not the Internet, which currently and I suspect never will be.

[BiggJawn]

12. This is a Solution looking for a Problem.

Broadband over Powerlines (BPL) is junk science and not needed.

you say it's a boon to people in rural areas. I live in a rural area. For $75 a month, plus a $200 radio modem, I can get 10Mbs wide band piped into my apartment via 2.4 Ghz radio link. For $49 a month, and a $90 cable modem, I can get at least 5Mbs access. The only reason I stay with 50K dial-up is because it's free through my work.The coverage map of my area has very few "holes" in it. BPL is not needed to "Web-ize Rural America", and the interference possibilities outweigh any advantage. BPL has been tried in Germany, and rejected as unworkable.

Look, the power grid was designed to carry and distribute 60 Hz ernergy, NOT a 10Mbs bit-rate. the data is going to leak out, this has been proven, and should not enter into this debate. I dierect you to the German experience again.

Who is pushing for BPL, besides Mikey Powell and the rest of his "New Technology Cheerleaders"? (what happened to the days when the FCC REGULATED, not "cheerled"?)

The people who make the BPL equipment, that's who.

And I'm curious about your claim that BPL "will open up more voices to the internet, not stiffle them." Please explain how somebody who can't afford the $75 a month for radio broadband will be able to afford BPL. Does the plan call for free distribution of BPL? please cite proof of this claim, and while you're at it, please disclose any financial interests you have in BPL. I smell a rat.

I'm a licensed user of the HF spectrum that will be impacted most by BPL. What should I do? Just give up? Sell my radio equipment and buy your BPL terminal equipment and monthly service? I don't think so. Sure, Mikey's den of theives claim that they will put "safeguards" in place that will "protect" me from harmful interference from BPL, but the NPRM (notice of propsed rulemaking) will put the burden of proof on me, and allow wide avenues for appeal by the BPL provider.

And lastly, as the blackout last summer showed, most of these power companies can't even get the stuff their plants are DESIGNED to carry delivered flawlessly. What reasonable person would think thier patched-up systems would work with BPL like the lab experiments show?

This is bad,junk science. The problems more than outweigh the benefits.
Now, to put on the tinfoil hat :tinfoilhat:
You wanna know WHY the FCC is pushing so hard for this? So the Fed doesn't have to spend money jamming shortwave stations to keep the Murkan Sheeple dumb and happy. They'll do it themselves with the new faster "BPL AOL".

[KharmaTrain]

13. Junk Science, Yes...But Not Some Sinister Plot

I agree that using the power grid is not the most efficient means of Internet connectivity and never meant to post it that way. This is just another form of transmission...another way to enable the medium to grow...it's that intention that I posted.

You won't get a disagreement with me about the pro-business and completely corrupt nature of the FCC and Powell's total ineptness. I wish the FCC served to regulate, not be a cheap source of band-use fees (shakedowns or giveaways) and political contributions to the GOOP party. They sell the airwaves to the highest bidder...usually one that has the best lobbyist, lawyers and connections. Powell and Billy Tauzin are the biggest whores in this area.

For a decade I've worked with internet broadcasting and the many possibilities it was. The greatest is it's freedom from FCC control/regulation by its use of the Internet. The downside of this technology presently is its connectivity...the ways people can hear this medium. Right now it's solely sitting in front of your PC, but there's a new generation of devices that will change that...Cellular, Wi-Fi, BPL, Satellite and other forms are part of this pipeline that can put thousands of voices in ones ear rather than the 5 or so that control the airwaves right now. Thus my support to deregulate the pipeline...get more people access to it in profiting from it, thus ensuring it's not tampered with by government regulation.

Yes, this sounds idealistic, but it's always very realistic and the technology is set to go...there's a crack in the wall to push through a new generation of communications that can take root and be an alternative to what currently exists. I hope you're at least in favor of this concept.

[BiggJawn]

15. Not in favour of connectivity at the expense of other users.

Let's say that my Ham Radio station gets into your computer and crashes it when I transmit. You'd be pissed, right? Why should MY use of the airwaves prevent you from listening to Mike Malloy, right? (we assume that my transmitter is well within the limits for spectral purity, etc.) You're not gonna be happy with the explaination that my gear is functioning correctly and Dell or Gateway or IBM left out $2's worth of filter parts in the design of your gear, right?

Now, put the shoe on the other foot. My local power utility gets into the ISP business with BPL. Overnight, all my MF/HF radio equipmewnt becomes useless. I can't even take the portable out on a picnic and use it, because I can't get far enough from the powerlines. i'm gonna be pissed, right? you bet I am.

THATS my beef. If BPL was proven to viable on a non-interference basis with other legitimate users of the spectrum, then there'd be no problem and they'd be using the hell out if in Europe and Asia. But there ARE problems with interference to other spectrum users, so that's why Germany's regulators gave BPL the big thumbs-down. the FCC sees only dollar signs in the eyes of GOP contibutors who think they're gonna make big bucks (and send some of those bucks into GOP war chests)off this drek. I'm a lot more excited about the radio link network that is in already place and co-existing with other spectrum users than this I am BPL train wreck...

This will back-fire, because a lot of radio Hams are RW, and the Ditto-Heads won't be able to listen to Oxy-boy, either...Sure, there's some neat things coming, but BPL is not one of them.

[dusty64]

11. Whenever this

rightwing FCC does something involving the internet I'd be worried.A majority is nothing more than corporate extremists solely looking to continue and solidify the Pravda stranglehold on the media, the internet is the LAST bastion of a free press and they know that. They can NOT be trusted!

[DemoTex]

14. BPL .. Broadband Over Powerlines

The FCC today agreed unanimously--with one partial dissent--to go forward with a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) on the subject of Broadband over Power Line (BPL). The NPRM is the next step in the BPL proceeding, which began last April with a Notice of Inquiry that attracted more than 5100 comments--many from the amateur community. The FCC did not propose any changes in Part 15 rules governing unlicensed devices, but said it would require BPL providers to apply "adaptive" interference mitigation techniques to their systems. An ARRL delegation attended the FCC open meeting in Washington, and League President Jim Haynie, W5JBP, expressed disappointment with the FCC's decision.

"I had hoped the FCC would have shown a greater depth of understanding of the issue," he said. Haynie also said he was dumfounded that FCC staff and some commissioners continued to tout BPL as a broadband and Internet solution for rural dwellers when "the economic reality of that possibility speaks for itself." Haynie said the FCC seemed to be echoing BPL industry publicity.

The FCC has not yet released the details of the NPRM, and a presentation by the FCC's Office of Engineering and Technology (OET) revealed only its broad outlines. But ARRL CEO David Sumner, K1ZZ, said the Commission's own presentation and the individual FCC members' comments demonstrated to him that the NPRM should have cut the permissible emission limits under Part 15.

http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/02/12/5/?nc=1

[BiggJawn]

16. Well, we will still have Echolink and IRLP, right, Mac?

Don' need no steenkin' RF....

[Nihil]

17. At least one pilot failed in Britain a few years ago

I can't locate a link but remember reading that one early pilot of
this idea generated so much interference that it was banned by the
UK authorities.

Not only did it wind up the general population (radio interference)
but, far more importantly, it screwed with the frequencies used by
the emergency services (ambulances in particular).

This would have been in the 90's but very hazy on the details I'm afraid.

Nihil