DOJ
Latest
Alliance for Broadband Competition forms to sway opinion against Verizon's AWS acquisition
The effort to prevent Verizon Wireless from its purchase of AWS licenses from SpectrumCo and Cox just became a bit more intense, as several opponents to the deal have now banded together to form the Alliance for Broadband Competition. The coalition includes T-Mobile and Sprint, along with advocacy groups such as Public Knowledge, the American Antitrust Institute, the Rural Cellular Association and the Rural Telecommunications Group. Today, the newly formed alliance held a press conference in which it called on the FCC and Department of Justice to block the transfer, which it said would lead to an "excessive concentration of spectrum" held by Verizon Wireless. While it's not much of an olive branch, the group similarly suggested that it would support the deal if Verizon were to divest some of its spectrum holdings, establish roaming agreements and agree to a backhaul pricing structure. As you may recall, Verizon Wireless estimates that it'll exhaust its network capacity by 2014. Regardless of how this $3.9 billion proposal shakes out, it's rather clear that something's gotta give.
Justice Department clears Google of WiFi wiretapping violations
Two years ago, Google drove its way into a fair amount of hot water when it accidentally (as was claimed) scooped up private data over WiFi while collecting Street View and location data. Now, the Justice Department has cleared the prolific mapsters of the wiretapping violations. The DOJ made its decision not to push for prosecution based on reports from employees and investigating key documents reports Wired. The Wiretap Act (which is the relevant one here) was argued to only pertain to "traditional radio services," by US District Judge James Ware, but neither the DOJ or FCC said they could find any evidence that Google accessed the date it snared. In an extra move of openness, the search giant has also released the entire FCC report on the Street View investigation (redacted to protect identities) which can be found in the more coverage link. So, next time you see the famous camera-topped wagons roll around, you can leave your tin hat in the closet.
Antitrust suit carries on against Intel, Apple, Google and others
They can hope and pray all that they want, but Google, Intel, Apple, Adobe, Intuit, Pixar and Lucasfilm will soon be facing some serious accusations in a courtroom under the Sherman Antitrust Act and California's Cartwright Act. After years of trying to dodge legal action over an "informal agreement" to not pinch each others employees, and an effort to have the case dismissed, the seven defendants will have to stand trial as ordered by District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, California. In her decision Koh said, not only was there evidence that these agreements were made at the highest levels of the company but, that six such deals were struck in secret in such a short time frame "suggests that these agreements resulted from collusion." There's still time for yet another deal to be struck, however, this time between the defendants and the DOJ. Otherwise it looks like all seven will have to stand trial in June of 2013.
Verizon selling 700MHz spectrum, but only if government approves its AWS purchase
Seems odd that Verizon would decide to sell off some of it's wireless spectrum considering it told the FCC that it doesn't have enough space for its future LTE needs. Yet Big Red's doing just that, pledging to pawn off its 700MHz A and B licenses should its purchase of AWS spectrum from a contingent of cable companies be approved by the FCC and DOJ. Why would Verizon do such a thing? It appears that the 700MHz upper C band (where VZW's LTE service currently resides) combined with the new AWS licenses will provide Big Red the bandwidth it needs. Plus, selling off some of its other spectrum will surely grease the wheels with the governmental powers that be, and perhaps even assuage Verizon's competition arrayed against its AWS acquisition. Of course, the A and B licenses being offered for sale don't blanket the nation, but they do cover quite a few large metropolitan markets. Check out the full list after the break. [Tower photo via Shutterstock]
Apple says e-book price fixing charges 'simply not true,' Macmillan also responds
Not that we were expecting Apple and Macmillan to simply fess up and say, "you're right, totally tried to circumvent the free market," but both companies have come out swinging pretty hard against the allegations of price fixing. Apple has rejected the charges, calling them "simply not true." A company spokesman, Tom Neumayr, went so far as to tell Reuters that Cupertino was actually fostering competition by "breaking Amazon's monopolistic grip on the publishing industry." John Sargent, the CEO of Macmillan, defended his company's behavior in blog post, saying the publisher had done nothing illegal and that the concessions sought by the DOJ in settlement negotiations were "too onerous." It looks like the next step for both is to face off with the US government in court -- a daunting task, no matter how large your war chest.
Apple officially responds to DOJ's antitrust case
Apple has officially responded to the antitrust claim brought against the company by the US Department of Justice. In the claim the DOJ says that Apple worked with five major publishers to illegally fix eBook pricing. In response to the lawsuit Apple spokesman Tom Neumayr told AllThingsD: The DOJ's accusation of collusion against Apple is simply not true. The launch of the iBookstore in 2010 fostered innovation and competition, breaking Amazon's monopolistic grip on the publishing industry. Since then customers have benefited from eBooks that are more interactive and engaging. Just as we've allowed developers to set prices on the App Store, publishers set prices on the iBookstore. Three of the five major publishers -- Hachette, HarperCollins, and Simon & Schuster -- have already settled with the DOJ. However, Penguin Group and MacMillan have vowed to fight the suit along with Apple. However, leading antitrust experts say that the DOJ has a "far better case" for price fixing among the publishers than they do against Apple. One reason is that Apple was allegedly not present at meetings with the five publisher when they decided to fix eBook pricing. Another reason: it's hard to bring an antitrust case against a company who only controls 10% of the eBook market through its iBookstore. Amazon, on the other hand, has a 90% share of the eBook market.
Australia pondering joining e-book lawsuit bandwagon
If Apple and the Big Five thought they only had to contend with a federal e-book lawsuit in the US, they'd better think again. Australia's Competition and Consumer Commission is inviting local businesses to raise formal concerns as it weighs up launching its own judicial broadside against the alleged cartel. The Commission refused to comment publicly on its plans beyond saying that it was "aware of the latest developments" and would listen to local resellers who had concerns about the Australian market. While Simon & Schuster, Hachette and HarperCollins made back-room deals with the DoJ yesterday, they'd still be involved (at least initially) with the second front of this conflict. Meanwhile, the threat remains of the European Union joining in: turning it from a spot of local trouble into a global courtroom battle for the future of e-book pricing.
Verizon's CEO has a plan for wireless pay-TV, if the government will allow it
Verizon CEO Lowell C. McAdam doesn't quite have all of those SpectrumCo AWS licenses in his pocket just yet, but if he does get them he has a decidedly old school idea of what to flood the airwaves with: TV. The Wall Street Journal quotes him saying Verizon and its new cable friends could have "the beginnings of an integrated offering" out by the holidays, so pay-TV customers could watch video on their mobile devices. Even though many of the TV services are already streaming video to tablets, PCs and phones, currently most subscription services are limited to the space of the home's WiFi network, unlike the video on-demand seen above. According to McAdam the potential to negotiate rights for outside the home streaming and even busting open the bundles for à la carte programming exist -- provided the FCC and DOJ allow Verizon to complete the proposed $3.9 billion purchase. Of course, consumption based billing would still be on the table, so don't start planning your streaming schedule just yet. For now we'll wait and see if the pros of this arrangement outweigh the cons (and how its Redbox play is mixed up in this), or if the pie-in-the-sky NowTV-style elements of the plan are merely being floated to get the deal done.
Carpathia wants to delete orphaned Megaupload data, pay the bills
The Federal shut down of Megaupload did more than jail its founders, scare its competitors and worry its users -- it also left Carpathia Hosting footing a $9,000 a day bill. The outfit previously agreed to preserve Megaupload's frozen data, but now that the service's unpaid bills are piling up, it's ready to change its tune. In a emergency motion filed with the U.S. Federal Court in Virginia, Carpathia asked the court to either take the data off its hands, pay it for retaining the data or else allow it to delete the data altogether after allowing users to reclaim their files. The hosting service won't take action on its own, it says, as that might "risk a claim by a party with an interest in the data," such as the Motion Picture Association of America. With any luck, the matter will be settled in a court hearing next month. If not? Well, we'll just take it as a lesson: back up locally, you never know when your files might get wrapped up in the legal system.
US DOJ sues AT&T for improper IP Relay billing, alleges millions in false claims to FCC
AT&T has violated the United States False Claims Act to the tune of "millions of dollars," according to a Department of Justice lawsuit filed this week. The DOJ alleges that the carrier intentionally neglected to authenticate users of the IP Relay service -- a tool utilized by hearing-impaired persons to type messages that communications assistants then read to callers. The service is also abused by individuals overseas to defraud U.S. businesses (think infamous Nigerian scams), which prompted the FCC to establish a law requiring telecom providers, including AT&T, to confirm the identity of registered users, which it apparently failed to do. This resulted in thousands of fraudulent users, representing some 95 percent of all calls, which AT&T received FCC payments for to the tune of $1.30 per minute. An AT&T spokesman was somewhat dismissive when speaking to the Associated Press, saying "as the FCC is aware, it is always possible for an individual to misuse IP Relay services, just as someone can misuse the postal system or an email account, but FCC rules require that we complete all calls by customers who identify themselves as disabled." But if the allegations are proven, there could be some pretty serious repercussions for Big Blue. DOJ PR is just past the break.
Apple begins defense against possible ebook antitrust case
Apple is wasting no time beginning to defend itself against the possibility of a U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) antitrust action alleging that the company conspired with publishers to fix ebook prices. Last week, Apple requested that a class action suit alleging price-fixing on ebooks be thrown out. Part of the suit hinges on a comment that Steve Jobs made to the Wall Street Journal's Walt Mossberg in January of 2010, saying that unhappy publishers might decide to withhold ebooks from Amazon. Lawyers in the class action suit think that Jobs's comment meant that Apple and publishers were conspiring to force Amazon to raise ebook prices. Apple's retort last week says that the lawyers "mischaracterized" the exchange, and that Jobs only meant that Apple had a different strategy in the ebook business than Amazon. Apple says that it wants to sell as many ebooks as possible, which is totally believable since the company is still a relative bit player in the ebook market. As a result, the company would not have an incentive to raise prices on ebooks. But Apple's argument fails to address accusations that Jobs schemed with publishers to slow Amazon's eventual move into the tablet market with the Kindle Fire. Apple's lawyers responded in their court filing last week by downplaying the threat of the Kindle Fire: But this allegation just strings together antitrust buzzwords.. Nor does this "Kindle theory" make sense on its own terms. For example, if Amazon was a "threat" that needed to be squelched by means of an illegal conspiracy, why would Apple offer Amazon's Kindle app on the iPad? Why would Apple conclude that conspiring to force Amazon to no longer lose money on eBooks would cripple Amazon's competitive fortunes? And why would Apple perceive the need for an illegal solution to the "Kindle threat" when it had an obvious and lawful one which it implemented – namely, introducing a multipurpose device (the iPad) whose marketing and sales success was not centered on eBook sales? There are rumors that some publishers are currently in settlement talks with the DOJ. These publishers might be exchanging damning information for a lesser settlement, which could spell trouble for both Apple and other publishers.
DOJ greenlights bid by Apple, Microsoft and RIM to buy Nortel patents
The US Department of Justice didn't just give the go-ahead to Google's acquisition of Motorola today, it also gave the greenlight to a $4.5 billion bid on Nortel's patents from a consortium of companies including Apple, Microsoft and RIM (who have dubbed themselves Rockstar Bidco). Nortel's portfolio includes some 6,000 patents, and the DOJ says the approval comes after it received clear commitments from Apple and Microsoft to license so-called standard essential patents on "fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms, as well as their commitments not to seek injunctions in disputes involving SEPs." To round things out for the day, the Justice Department has also given its clearance to Apple's acquisition of certain Novell patents, which have been held by CPTN Holdings pending approval. Its full statement can be found after the break.
Report: Google hires Apple exec to work on 'secret project'
Google appears to have scored another coup in its ongoing rivalry with Apple, having reportedly lured one of the company's senior directors to its Mountain View headquarters. Simon Prakash, pictured above, has worked at Apple for more than eight years, most recently serving as the firm's senior director of product integrity. According to VentureBeat, however, that tenure has come to a close, now that Google has hired Prakesh to work on a "secret project." The report speculates that this project could be helmed by co-founder Sergey Brin, and that it may be mobile-related, though declarative statements were few and far between. Prior to arriving at Apple, Prakash served as director of engineering design validation at Cielo Communications, and held managerial positions at 3Com. VentureBeat claims he'll be starting work at Google today, though the company has yet to issue any statement on the matter. Once finalized, though, the hiring could help dispel some of those "no poach" accusations flying around federal courts.
Megaupload co-founder's bail appeal rejected
While users housing content on the troubled Megaupload site were given a two-week reprieve, one of its co-founders is having less luck. Kim Dotcom has lost his appeal for bail, with prosecutors fearing that he would flee from New Zealand and return to his native Germany, possibly making him safe from extradition. According to the BBC, the prosecution alleged that Dotcom -- formerly Kim Schmitz -- had multiple passports and bank accounts, and "a history of fleeing criminal charges." His next court appearance his scheduled for February 22nd.
Megaupload users' data to be kept another two weeks, EFF to help folks retrieve it
Megaupload's digital doors may have been closed due to the presence of pirated materials, but there's still the matter of all that legal content residing on its servers. Naturally, folks want their files back, but now that the government's gotten what it needs, the hosting companies no longer need to keep the data around because Megaupload's no longer paying them to do so. Carpathia Hosting and Cogent Communications, however, have decided to preserve the data for another two weeks while a deal is brokered with the DOJ for its release. In the meantime, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has teamed up with Carpathia to create a website that puts folks in touch with EFF attorneys so users can try to retrieve their data. No word as to what legal wrangling the EFF can do to make it happen, but those affected can get the wheels of justice started at the source below.
In the wake of Megaupload crackdown, fear forces similar sites to shutter sharing services?
The Feds put the smackdown on Megaupload and its whole executive team last week, charging them with criminal charges for copyright infringement and racketeering in addition to conspiracy to commit copyright infringement and money laundering. As a result, it appears that several other cloud locker companies have curbed their sharing ways to avoid similar DOJ entanglements. FileSonic and Fileserve have eliminated file sharing from their service menus, and Uploaded.to is no longer available to those of us in the US. Naturally, none of these companies have said that Megaupload's legal problems are the reason for the changes, but the timing suggests it's more than mere coincidence. Disagree? Feel free to speculate about the possibilities in the comments below, and let us know if any other online storage services have made similar moves while you're at it.
DOJ investigation yields fresh evidence against Google, Apple in antitrust lawsuit
Back in 2009, a small controversy began swirling around Google and Apple, amid allegations that the two companies had struck an informal agreement to not poach each other's employees. The Department of Justice launched an investigation into the matter in 2010, but details of the case were only made public for the first time yesterday. TechCrunch was the first to sift through the documents, and has uncovered some ostensibly incriminating evidence against not only Google and Apple, but Pixar, Lucasfilm, Adobe, Intel, and Intuit, as well. According to filings from the US District Court for the Northern District of California, these companies did indeed enter "no poach" agreements with each other, and agreed to refrain from engaging in bidding wars. The documents also suggest that they collectively sought to limit their employees' power to negotiate for higher salaries. Some of the most apparently damning evidence derives from archived e-mails, including one that Adobe CEO Bruce Chizen penned to Steve Jobs in May 2005. In the message, sent under the subject "Recruitment of Apple Employees," Adobe's SVP of human resources explains that "Bruce and Steve Jobs have an agreement that we are not to solicit ANY Apple employees, and vice versa." Pixar's Lori McAdams expressed similar sentiments in an internal e-mail from 2007, writing: "I just got off the phone with Danielle Lambert [of Apple], and we agreed that effective now, we'll follow a Gentleman's agreement with Apple that is similar to our Lucasfilm agreement." This would suggest, as the DOJ writes, that there's "strong evidence that the companies knew about the other express agreements, patterned their own agreements off of them, and operated them concurrently with the others to accomplish the same objective." The DOJ announced in September that it had reached settlements with the six implicated firms, but a class-action lawsuit is scheduled to get underway next week in San Jose.
Tech's biggest misfires of 2011
The past 12 months have been a boon of technological innovation, particularly in the world of mobile devices, where top companies have been waging an arms race for the top of the smartphone and tablet hills. Not everything has been smooth sailing, however -- 2011 has also been dotted by delays, false starts, security breeches and straight up technological turf outs. Check out some of the lowlights from the year that was after the break.
Justice Department antitrust division probing Verizon cable spectrum deals
Looks like AT&T isn't the only major carrier having issues with the guv'ment lately. Remember that 20MHz AWS spectrum that Verizon got from Cox Communications for a cool $315 million this month? How's about that juicy spectrum Big Red scored from Comcast, Time Warner and Bright House for $3.6 billion? Well, it turns out those deals are raising an eyebrow or two over at the Justice Department, which just launched an investigation into the matter. A spokesperson for the department confirmed the probe with Bloomberg News but declined to provide further details. A source familiar with the investigation, however, says the antitrust division is involved. Apparently, there's concern that the deal puts too much control of the airwaves in the hands of Verizon. For its part, Verizon declined to comment, saying it has yet to receive information about the investigation.
T-Mobile USA and AT&T's seven-year UMTS roaming agreement gets detailed
Oddly enough, the main upside of the proposed T-Mobile USA / AT&T tie-up is coming to fruition, despite the fact that neither carrier will be merging into the other. We'd heard shortly after the breakup that both operators would be agreeing to a seven-year roaming deal, but hadn't noticed any specifics on it until now. According to T-Mob's parent company Deutsche Telekom, the two have come to terms on a UMTS roaming agreement for the US (read: no international deals here), which will "allow [T-Mobile] to improve its footprint significantly among the US population and offer its customers better broadband coverage for mobile communications services in the future." The carrier's population coverage will increase from 230 million potential customers at present to 280 million. As a result of the deal with AT&T, coverage will be extended to many regions of America in which T-Mobile USA previously had neither its own high-speed mobile communications network nor the associated roaming agreements. As if that weren't enough, T-Mobile USA will also receive a large package of AWS mobile spectrum in 128 Cellular Market Areas (CMAs), including 12 of the top 20 markets (Los Angeles, Dallas, Houston, Atlanta, Washington, Boston, San Francisco, Phoenix, San Diego, Denver, Baltimore and Seattle). Oh, and Deutsche Telekom gets $3 billion in cash. #winning
