regulatory
Latest
Patent spar between ZTE, Ericsson escalates to courtroom showdown
Like nostrils, tensions are flaring between two powerhouses in the wireless industry. Ericsson and ZTE have chosen to trade off the role of both plaintiff and defendant, since each company is suing the other for several patent infringements. It's hard to say who the guilty party really is -- with the number of accusations flying around, it's possible everyone is at fault somehow. All we know is that Ericsson challenged its rival company to a throwdown once attempts to reach a licensing agreement failed two weeks ago. ZTE accepted the challenge and raised the stakes by filing a lawsuit of its own. It's not exactly clear what got the quarelling pair's feathers all ruffled, though it reportedly involves 4G / WCDMA / GSM network technology employed in each other's handsets. That sure narrows it down, doesn't it? At least we have a good idea of what's up for grabs: as is oftentimes the case in these types of tumultuous proceedings, the loser has to stop selling the products and services in question and fork over some cash for damages caused to the winner. Why oh why can't we all just get along? [Thanks, Alex]
Verizon and MetroPCS objections to FCC net neutrality rules dismissed in case of premature litigation
The FCC wants to put new rules in place ensuring access to the web is, like justice, blind to where a person is coming from and indifferent to where on the web he is going to. Verizon's first reaction to these new directives was to publicly decry them as overreaching, and its second was to file a lawsuit, one that was swiftly echoed by MetroPCS. Only problem with their plans? The rules haven't yet been published in the Federal Register, which renders the legal challenges from the two eager mobile carriers "incurably" premature. Such was the determination of the US Court of Appeals, which refused to make a substantive ruling and just threw the cases out due to the technicality. Verizon isn't discouraged, however, and promises to bide its time until all the dominoes have fallen into place before launching another legal attack. Hey, whatever keeps those lawyers in their fancy suits.
Microsoft lodges antitrust complaint against Google with European Commission, ignores irony
So Microsoft doesn't like anticompetitive behavior, huh? Since when? Brad Smith, General Counsel for the Redmond rabblerousers, has posted a lengthy blog post outlining Microsoft's concerns with "a pattern of actions that Google has taken to entrench its dominance" in online search and ads, which he claims is detrimental to European consumers. Funnily enough, half the post is about Google's legal issues in the US, but we'll set that aside for now. What this boils down to is that Microsoft is finally taking the gloves off -- Google accused it of pushing other companies to do its dirty work -- and is now adding its name to the list of objectors to Mountain View's stranglehold on search in Europe. The European Commission is already taking a regulatory looksee at Google's tactics, so this isn't sparking off a new investigation, but it does add the glamor of two big names locking legal horns yet again. Hit the source link for Brad's exposition of Google's villainous wrongdoings.
Vimpelcom moves forward with $6 billion Wind Mobile merger, intends to hurdle regulatory snags
If you thought Verizon Wireless and Alltel's marriage underwent a good bit of scrutiny, you'll soon be swearing that Vimpelcom and Wind Mobile are on some sort of global watch list. The Amsterdam-based Vimpelcom has taken a giant leap towards the completion of a $6 billion merger with Wind Telecom, the latter of which has around 117 million subscribers spread across Algeria, Bangladesh, Egypt, Pakistan, North Korea and Canada. If and when the two link hands, the combined effort will be home to a staggering 173 million customers, creating the fifth largest mobile operator by subscriber count. Wind Mobile's head honcho seems more than enthused about the news, and he's hoping that the tie-up will allow prices to sink for just about everyone involved. Claiming feats such as "more access to international cooperation for roaming and long distance services" and the ability to utilize "more leverage and increased scale" to drive down prices, Anthony Lacavera isn't showing any public signs of worry when it comes to regulatory hurdles. In months past, the CRTC took issue with Globalive Wireless -- operator of Wind Mobile -- starting up in Canada, primarily due to the company's largest lender (Orascom) residing outside of the Great White North. As of now, things seem to be sailing right along, but you can bet this marriage won't be formally recognized before a borderline-obnoxious amount of investigating goes down behind the scenes. [Thanks, Kelvin]
FCC approves Comcast's purchase of NBC (Update: Justice Department too, it's done)
No huge surprise here, but the FCC just approved Comcast's purchase of NBC Universal by a 4-1 vote. Details of the ruling aren't out yet, but FCC chairman Julius Genachowski had been pushing for strong regulations forbidding Comcast from cutting itself sweetheart deals on NBC content or prioritizing its own video traffic on its pipes, so we'd assume that's part of the agreement here. The only nay vote was from Commissioner Michael Copps, who said the deal "opens the door to the cable-ization of the open Internet." Ouch. We'll let you know when we find out exactly what the FCC's actual conditions are -- and keep in mind this deal won't be wrapped until the Justice Department weighs in, which is expected to happen next week. Can we say it? Oh, we're going to say it: stay tuned! Update: That was fast, as Comcast/NBCU announced it's received permission from the Justice Department as well. Check out the triumphant press release after the break or scour the official site for more details on what conditions may have applied. There will also be a conference call at 4 p.m. so let us know what else you may be interested in finding out before then. So far details include a promise of a "focused mechanism for online video providers to obtain access to certain NBC Universal content," and that the newly formed entity will retain its economic stake in Hulu, while giving up its voting and board representation rights.
FCC addressing net neutrality on December 21st (updated)
Well, well, look at what's been added to a tentative agenda when the FCC meets on December 21st: net neutrality. Here's how the item reads: Open Internet Order: An Order adopting basic rules of the road to preserve the open Internet as a platform for innovation, investment, competition, and free expression. These rules would protect consumers' and innovators' right to know basic information about broadband service, right to send and receive lawful Internet traffic, and right to a level playing field, while providing broadband Internet access providers with the flexibility to reasonably manage their networks. Presumably, a draft order is now circulating amongst attendees, the details of which are of the utmost concern for both consumers and wired / wireless providers alike. According to the AP, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski will outline his net neutrality proposal in a speech on Wednesday, with plans to bring the new rules to a full vote before the end of the year and ahead of the newly elected Republicans taking their seats in the House. Update: The AP received an advanced copy of Genachowski's speech. Here are the highlights of the FCC proposal: Wired broadband providers will be required to let subscribers access all legal content, applications, and services with the flexibility to manage network congestion and spam as long as they publicly disclose their network management approach. Broadband providers would also be allowed to experiment with dedicated networks to route traffic from specialized services like smart grids and home security systems as long as they "don't hurt the public internet." Wireless providers would also be required to disclose network management practices and be prohibited from blocking access to web sites or competing applications like cellphone VoIP services. However, they'd be given more flexibility to manage traffic due to relative bandwidth constraints. In other words, wireless networks will still be special under the FCC proposal, just not as special as the plan pitched by Google / Verizon (which only required transparency) over the summer. The proposal would leave the FCC's regulatory framework for broadband unchanged as a lightly regulated "information service," not as a "common carrier" as Genachowski had wanted. Another victory for Comcast. Update 2: The New York Times says that the proposal will allow broadband companies to implement usage-based pricing, charging customers higher rates for heavy data usage.
AT&T asks FCC to phase out landline regulations
A day without landline phones? Some may say that's inevitable, but it looks like AT&T is now starting to try to speed things up a bit, with it recently responding to an FCC request for comments with a 32-page filing that details its position on the matter. That more or less boils down to two major requests: that the FCC eliminate the regulatory requirements that it support a landline network, and that it provide a firm deadline for phasing it out. To back up that request, AT&T has provided the FCC with a whole host of statistics that paint a bleak picture for landlines, including the fact that less than 20% of Americans rely exclusively on switched-access lines for voice service (though plenty more still use them as their primary voice service), that at least 18 million homes now use a VoIP service, and that those two numbers are fast growing in opposite directions. Needless to say, such a change would have a broad range of regulatory implications, and AT&T isn't providing answers for everything -- like exactly how it expects that last mile of users to transition away from landlines, or how to deal with issues of public safety or those with disabilities.
Statistics point to China's growing significance in MMO industry
We've been mentioning a bit about some of the regulatory issues in China affecting massively multiplayer online games, particularly as they concern some Western game companies. However, a number of gamers in the West have wondered something along the lines of, "What does this have to do with me?" Well, in terms of Western markets directly, not much. But China is significant for the MMO industry seen as a whole.China will be the world's largest MMO market moving forward and as broadband speeds and penetration increase, the numbers of online gamers will keep rising. The current regulatory changes put forth by China's General Administration of Press and Publication (GAPP) stands to have a major impact on how online games are operated in this market, ranging from implementation of a "fatigue system" (where play time is limited each day) to censorship of game content. The country has over 55.5 million online gamers, with a total market for virtual transactions between USD 1.4 billion and 1.9 billion (RMB 10-13 billion), according to 2008 statistics released by the China Internet Network Information Center (as reported in English by JLM Pacific Epoch).
Wrath of the Lich King rejected thus far by Chinese government
Continuing on in that upward ascension toward MMO godhood, Blizzard's Wrath of the Lich King expansion for World of Warcraft has proven to be popular with the Death Knight crowd in Western markets. "Popular" is an understatement, of course. Millions of MMO gamers have bought the expansion to date. Despite its success in Western markets, Wrath of the Lich King still hasn't been released in China, where the title has a significant playerbase. Why? Regulatory issues and censorship. China-based JLM Pacific Epoch reports: "The government has rejected two applications by the second expansion for The9's (Nasdaq: NCTY) licensed MMORPG World of Warcraft, "Wrath of the Lich King," [...] The applications were rejected due to content that didn't meet requirements, including a city raid and skeleton characters; the submitted version did not contain WLK's Death Knight first hero class..."
VIZIO seeks to trim the pork, joins the "CUT FATT" PR campaign
Apparently still stinging from its MPEG-LA licensing tussle, VIZIO is throwing its weight behind the Coalition to Terminate Financial Abuses of the Television Transmission ("CUT FATT," and no, we're not sure where the "U" came from). Claiming excessive and unregulated patent fees related to FCC regulations for producing DTV-ready sets that have already exceeded a Dr. Evil-esque one-billion dollars, the crux of the argument is that since 2007, US consumers have paid 20-30 times the licensing fees as compared to European and Japanese consumers for "essentially the same technology," and CUT FATT would like to see the FCC rein in these fees to competitive rates. VIZIO is claiming this is an effort to stand behind the American consumer, but we'd like to know how much the company would cut retail prices on its already relatively strong sales. Still, we can't argue with the company's rights to do what it can to seek higher profitability as it balances value and upscale marketing messages.[Bacon briefcase image courtesy saynotocrack]
Regulatory revision opens up South Korean handset market
Good news for South Koreans who love choice; bad news for LG and Samsung... sort of. For those unaware, South Korea is currently under a rule that requires cellphones that connect to the internet to "use domestic software that standardizes network access." In theory, the regulation makes life easier for local software developers, but in reality, it has enabled locally-based LG and Samsung to combine for around 90% of all handset sales in the nation. Moving forward, however, the Korea Communications Commission intends to modify the barrier (effective next April) so that cellphone operators can use "any type of phone" they choose. We suspect three cheers for competition are in order.
Regulators put pressure on Sprint to remedy issues with iDEN network
Although Sprint has coughed up some $1 billion over the past few years in order to nix the interference between 2,200 public safety agencies across the US and its iDEN network, it apparently hasn't done enough. Reportedly, the FCC has warned Sprint that it "could lose access to the signal spectrum used by its Nextel- and Boost Mobile-branded wireless services" if it doesn't remedy the problem by June of 2008. Supposedly, Sprint is "working hard" to settle the issue, but it's not wasting any time asking the US Court of Appeals to get involved. The carrier claims that these shut down threats could force it to halt signups of Nextel-branded customers, and furthermore, around three million public-safety workers would purportedly lose service if the FCC did indeed shut down the Nextel network. 'Course, industry analysts are suggesting that regulators wouldn't really go through with shutting it down, but if nothing else, this should light a fire under Sprint to expedite the process.[Via PhoneScoop]
US in-flight calling can't catch a break, ruled out for "foreseeable future"
As the long-running fight for US in-flight calling (or the lack thereof) rages on, it seems that we're finally getting a definitive answer on the matter -- for the time being, of course. According to Telegraph Travel, Les Dorr, of the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA), stated that "proposals to lift the ban on in-flight mobiles had caused such an outcry [that] they had been dropped." Furthermore, it was noted that aviation authorities had "ruled out the use of mobile phones on planes for the foreseeable future." Unfortunately, there was little exaggeration beyond that, but it seems that in-flight calling on US flights is on hiatus for the time being.[Via Textually]
European Commission looks into Blu-ray studio agreements
European regulators have begun an inquiry into possible antitrust and anticompetitive practices by the Blu-ray Disc Association as it relates to agreements and restrictions on producing content for Blu-ray and its competing high-definition format, HD DVD. At the urging of some in the HD DVD camp, the European Commission has sent letters to many of the Hollywood studios asking them to produce any correspondence relating to their backing of the Blu-ray format. Of the major studios, Sony, Disney, Fox, Lions Gate, and MGM only release titles on Blu-ray, while only Universal is exclusive to HD DVD. Analysts say much is riding on the outcome of which format wins, with sales of content and players as a big incentive for either side. Is this inquiry just a case of sour grapes by HD DVD that sees itself as in trouble while Blu-ray has better agreements with studios? Or is the BDA not playing fair by using those vertical relationships to form a de facto monopoly? Those in the EU aim to find out.[Thanks, LJKelley]
