Summary
For
several generations, the TV audience happily embraced scheduled programming.
For the industry, making a connection with consumers was a pretty
straightforward, one-to-many experience…until NOW! Today's audience are
becoming increasingly fragmented, splicing their time among myriad media
choices, channels migrated to more specialize, niche content via cable,
and multichannel offerings. Now, with
the growing availability of on demand, self-programming and search features,
some experiences are moving beyond niche to individualized viewing. Further, increasing competition from
convergence players in TV, telecommunications, the Internet and now Mobile, the
industry is confronting unparalleled levels of complexity, dynamic change and
pressure to innovate.
On May 15, 2014 the FCC filed Notice of
proposed Rule-making – In the matter of Protecting and Promoting the Open
Internet, and started with a fundamental question: What is the right public policy to ensure that the Internet remain
open?
For some (End uses) it should remain open a free as it is today. For others
(Broadband provider) believe it needs to be tamed and changed to meet the
growing need and cost to keep ahead of the changing technology curve. But for iClick2Media
(Edge provider) believes a hybrid a true middle ground that meets all the parts
and or members in the Internet food chain wants, needs and desires. Where
Broadband provider are able to meet the demands
of the consumers use; Where Edge provider both big and small play on a true
equal playing field; and the End user continues to receive speed that are
comparable to American’s growing needs.
The fear of many Edge providers and End users is if unchecked or specific
guidelines are not put into play Broadband providers will have freedoms to
control behaviors and limit access of competitive Edge providers and frustrate
the End user with control of speeds creating a type of censorship and
ultimately will be the end of “virtuous circle of innovation” and in its place
a hybrid monopoly where Broadband providers can create new business models such
as "fast lanes” that create a hierarchy for some. Or create bait and
switch of fees where the End users believes it pays for one thing and is given
something else that is suppose to be comparable but is not i.e. paying for an
unlimited plan but throttling the End users speed down if they reach a certain
point how is that UNLIMITED? How about when Broadband provider become Edge
provider and have similar content as some small business Edge provider and
because Broadband providers controls the speeds and services it can and has mechanism
to slow and or interrupt other Edge providers who’s content is similar creating
a window of opportunity for End users to discover the Broadband provider’s content.
Finally because there are only a hand full of Broadband providers it is in
there best interest to create consortiums that create their own set of
guidelines that pushes higher fees to Edge provider and End users. Because of
our dependency on the Internet if we are not carful in how we respond to this
Order we could be on the path to recreating of the Ma Bell
of
yesteryear.
As
the CEO|CMO of iClick2Media and Managing Partner of Independent Creative Artist
- A Digital Content Collective I have spent considerable amount of time
reading, researching and contemplating how I was going to answer all the
questions in the FCC’s Notice of Proposed Rule-making In the Matter of
Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet. Because of the number of comments
the FCC is seeking I am going to limit my answers to several key areas.
This
White Paper will addresses the following:
1.
Brief
History of Telecommunications
a.
The
logic of competition Law
2.
Why
is there a need for a fair and open Internet for all who use, rely and need
access to an open Internet
a.
How
having the Openness of the Internet as the Commission explained in its 2010
Open Internet Order, the Internet’s open architecture allows innovators and
consumers at the edges of the network “to create and determine the success or
failure of content, applications, services and devices,” without requiring
permission from the broadband provider to reach end users.
b.
As
an open platform, it fosters diversity and it enables people to build
communities.
3.
Develop
the Strongest Legal Framework for Enforceable Rules of the Road
a.
Reflects
the principles that Chairman Wheeler outlined in February, including using the
Section 706 blueprint for restoring the Open Internet rules offered by the D.C.
Circuit in its decision in Verizon v. FCC, which relies on the FCC’s legal
authority under Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
b.
At
the same time, the Commission will seriously consider the use of Title II of
the Communications Act as the basis for legal authority.
c.
Seeks
comment on the benefits of both Section 706 and Title II, including the
benefits of one approach over the other to ensure the Internet remains an open
platform for innovation and expression.
d.
Explores
other available sources of legal authority, including also Title III for
wireless services. The Commission seeks comment on the best ways to define,
prevent, expose and punish the practices that threaten an Open Internet.
4.
Ensure
choices for consumers and opportunity for innovators:
a.
Proposes
a requirement that all users must have access to fast and robust service:
Broadband consumers must have access to the content, services and applications
they desire. Innovators and edge providers must have access to end-users so
they can offer new products and services.
b.
Considers ensuring that these standards of
service evolve to keep pace with of innovation.
c.
In
light of the important role that the Internet now plays as a vehicle for
communication of all sorts—both for consumers and content providers—how should
we consider the potential impact on social and personal expression of an
Internet whose openness was not protected?
5.
Prevent
practices that can threaten the Open Internet:
a.
Asks
if paid prioritization should be banned outright.
b.
Promises
clear rules of the road and aggressive enforcement to prevent unfair treatment
of consumers, edge providers and innovators.
c.
Includes
a rebuttable presumption* that exclusive contracts that prioritize service to broadband
affiliates are unlawful. (*Rebuttable presumption is a presumption that is
taken to be true unless someone comes forward to contest it and proves
otherwise)
6.
Expand
transparency
a.
Enhance
the transparency rules to provide increased and specific information about
broadband providers’ practices for edge providers, consumers.
b.
Asks
whether broadband providers should be required to disclose specific network
practices, performance characteristics (e.g., effective upload and download
speeds, latency and packet loss) and/or terms and conditions of service to end
users (e.g., data caps).
c.
Tentatively
concludes that broadband providers should disclose “meaningful information”
about the service, including (1) tailored disclosures to end users, (2)
congestion that may adversely impact the experience of end users, including at
interconnection points, and (3) information about new practices, like any paid
prioritization, to the extent that it is otherwise permitted.
7.
Protect
consumers, innovators and startups through new rules and effective enforcement:
a.
Proposes
the creation of an ombudsperson with significant enforcement authority to serve
as a watchdog and advocate for start-ups, small businesses and consumers.
b.
Seeks
comment on how to ensure that all parties, and especially small businesses and
start-ups, have effective access to the Commission’s dispute resolution and
enforcement processes.
c.
Considers
allowing anonymous reporting of violations to alleviate fears by start-ups of
retribution from broadband providers.
8.
Consider
the Impact on the Digital Divide: Ensuring access for all communities:
a.
Considers
the impact of the proposals on groups who disproportionately use mobile
broadband service.
b.
Asks
whether any parts of the nation are being left behind in the deployment of new
broadband networks, including rural America and parts of urban America.
9.
Conclusion
1.
Brief History of Telecommunications
For the first time in this country history
there is one space where equality is really working and that is the Internet. The
Internet has become the voice of the voiceless, the playground for creative
intelligence and the founding father’s purest meaning of freedom of speech and
assembly. This digital grassroots medium has allowed causes, social issues, and
concerns to spread and share worldwide. This digital marketplace (the Internet)
is fertile ground where small start-ups, big media corporation, creative
partnerships and Mom & Pop operations can compete for End users seeking
alternative options from Edge providers to view content and the type of content
that is created for a specific targeted consumer. iClick2Media will side on the side that the
Internet needs to be open and free to facilitate the virtuous cycle of innovation,
entrepreneurism and continue technology development of growth. But also realize
the need for change to keep innovation moving and growing on an equal playing
field must happen if this type of circle of innovation is to continue.
2.
Why there’s a need for a fair and open Internet for all who
use, rely and need access to an open Internet
a.
How
having the Openness of the Internet as the Commission explained in its 2010
Open Internet Order, the Internet’s open architecture allows innovators and
consumers at the edges of the network “to create and determine the success or
failure of content, applications, services and devices,” without requiring
permission from the broadband provider to reach end users.
Today’s consumers are more connected that
ever. With more access to and deeper engagement with content and brands, thanks
to the proliferation of digital device, platforms and mobile apps. Content that
was once only available to consumers via specific methods of delivery (such as
via print, radio and broadcast television) can now be sourced and delivered to
consumers through their multiple connected devices. This is driving the media revolution
and blurring traditional media definitions.
Obtaining information via the Internet drives
all the way we communicate, acquire information and form perspectives. We have
become an engaging multi-device user in those pursuits. For example online video
viewing and TV Everywhere authenticated video is being led by mobile devices,
gaming consoles, and OTT (Over The Top) devices as broadcasters, pay-TV
services provider, and advertisers look for ways to engage the multi-device
consumer. To meet the needs of these demanding views, whom are watching more
video online than ever before, media and entertainment companies must
understand the trends
,
and be able to co-exist and have a space that affords real equal innovation.
Since the dawn of Internet, for many changed
the way we think, care work, teach and educate. Each of entity in the circle can’t
live without the other and each needs each other in order to survive. However
with changing behaviors of End users absorb information, Broadband providers and
Edge Provider must be mindful as they attempt to meet the End users needs, that
they remain innovative and not be disturbed the cornerstone of this innovation
the virtuous circle.
Proponents of net neutrality or to use the
Commission’s preferred term, “Internet openness” - worry about the relationship
between broadband providers and edge providers. They fear that broadband
providers might prevent their end-user subscribers from accessing certain Edge
providers altogether, or might as a means of favoring their own competing
content or services or to enable them to collect fees from certain Edge
providers
.
The problem rests with the relationship between Broadband Providers and Edge providers
and because Broadband provider have had prior “Bad Acts” may Edge providers and
End users are concern if the internet changes these Bad Acts will become a part
of the Broadband business model. For many of the Broadband providers who are
becoming Edge providers realize this need to become apart of its business model
of growth. The choice of where content come from has also complicated the
landscape because the advent of “cord-cutters”. There are more than 12 million
End users whom have cut the cord to cable and are relying on their broadband
service to view content from such Edge provider as Hulu and Netflix.
In the Open Internet Order, the Commission
specifically, found that the Internet openness’ enables a
“Virtuous circle of Innovation” in which new users of the network-
including new content application, services and devices-lead Providers will
lead to increase end-users demand for broadband which drives network
improvements, which in turn leads to further innovative network uses
.
This type innovation and digital entrepreneurialism is what has made this
country a beacon of light to the world. The goal should be to find the right
balance where all parties get what the NEED not what they WANT.
What iClick2Media would like to see and or
suggest in the policy where the “Virtuous
circle of Innovation” in which new users of the network-including new
content application, services and devices-lead Providers will lead to increase
end-users demand for broadband which drives network improvements, which in turn
leads to further innovative network uses continues but has the ability to
expand and create innovative ideas continues this cycle moving and growing.
However leaving the Internet as it is after the D.C. Circuit court ruling would
only allow Broadband provider to continuing to push the envelop to creating a
hybrid monopoly where Edge provider and End users would not have the freedom
that has gotten us to this breaking point.
b.
As an open platform, it fosters diversity and it enables
people to build communities.
Understanding free-expression of ideas on the Internet has
fostered REAL diversity, has cause billions of End user to join political
movements, express opinions and share ideas with others whom hold some of the
same value that may be hundreds of miles away build “digital communities”. The Internet as it is today allows that to
happen. Every tweet, Facebook posting about a cause, or the creation of a blog
about what matters to them gives every American the power to become a digital
news outlet regardless of its relevance. For the first time in this country
history the American people have been able to removed all barriers, give a
voice to the voiceless, a forum to pool ideas, a space where every man, women
or child could become a mighty giant all powered by the Internet. If you look back through time starting with
President Lincoln’s use of the telegraph (T-Mails) to President Obama’s YouTube
channel (The White House) their ability to get their messages out to the people
has gone from a few (telegraph) to millions with the touch of a button (Internet).
IClick2Media’ is not proposing, that the FCC make no changes because realistically
that would stump the growth of the Internet and innovation. But what
iClick2Media is suggesting is a set of fair guideline that takes into account
small business in the real sense, expanding Broadband providers growth
3. Develop
the Strongest Legal Framework for Enforceable Rules of the Road
iClick2Media
position is simple, the FCC has the authority and the rights granted to it by
congress to ensure telecommunication policy is designed to maximize efficiency
through competition. The logic of competition and antitrust in the United
States is to guard against restriction and impediments to competition that are
not likely to be naturally corrected by competitive forces. Thought this is true we are faced with a
different type of competition that works in a system where each person in the
circle needs the other in order for the “virtuous circle of innovation” to continue.
a.
Regulatory Authority History
The Telecommunication
Act of 1996 addressed the issue of whether the federal Government should intervene
to prevent a “digital divide” in broadband access. Section 706 requires the FCC
to determine whether “advance telecommunication capabilities [i.e., broadband
or high- speed access] are being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and
timely fashion.” If this is the case, the act directs the FCC to take immediate
action to accelerate deployment of such capability by removing barriers to infrastructure
investment and by promoting competition in the telecommunications markets.
b. Legal
Framework for Enforceable Rules of the Road
Throughout
the Section 706 proceedings
,
parties had petitioned the FCC to take action in light of some problem in the
deployment of advance service to all Americans. The FCC initially responded
that Section 706 confers the FCC with the authority to report, but is not
authority to take regulatory action.
· “Section 706(a) does not
constitute an independent grant of forbearance authority or of authority to
employ other regulating methods
The
FCC first sought to assert that Section 706 granted it authority in the Comcast
case where FCC sought to enforce the Four Broadband Principles. However, the
D.C. Circuit concluded that the FCC was bound by its own decision in the Advance
Service Order that Section 706 granted it no such authority, and there had been
no APA proceeding to change that conclusion:
· Section 706 “does not
constitute and independent grant of authority.” Comcast (quoting Advance
Service Order, Because the Commission
has “Never questioned, let alone overruled, that understanding of section 706” it
remain[ed] bound” by its prior interpretation.
Now
in the Open Internet proceeding, the FCC again concluded that section
706 does confer it with authority to take
action. This time, however, the FCC addressed its interpretation of section 706
in the Advanced Services Order and gave a reasoned explanation to why it was
reversing it interpretation. Open Internet Order
(“To
the extent that the Advance Service Order can be construed as having red
section 706(a) differently, we reject that reading of the statue for the reason
discussed in the text”)
On
appeal, the D.C. Circuit up held with the FCC interpretation under Chevron
(although
the court also reversed the FCC, holding that the FCC cannot treat ISPs as
common carrier (non-discrimination) where the FCC has concluded that they are
not common carriers). This of course beg the question of what Section 706
authorizes the FCC to do:
"Although
the Commission once disclaimed authority to regulate under section 706(a), it
never disclaimed authority to regulate the Internet or Internet providers
altogether, nor is there any similar history of congressional reliance on such
a disclaimer. To the contrary, as recounted above
when Congress passed section 706(a) in 1996, it did so against the backdrop of
the Commission’s long history of subjecting to common carrier regulation the
entities that controlled the last-mile facilities over which end users accessed
the Internet. See, e.g., Second Computer Inquiry
.
Indeed, one might have thought, as the Commission originally concluded, see
Advanced Services Order
that
Congress clearly contemplated that the Commission would continue regulating
Internet providers in the manner it had previously. Cf. Brand X
, Justice
Breyer, stated in concurring opinion concluding that the Commission’s decision
to exempt cable broadband providers from Title II regulation was “perhaps just
barely” within the scope of the agency’s “statutorily delegated authority;
Id. at 1005 Justice Scalia, dissenting arguing
that Commission’s decision “exceeded the authority given it by Congress”. In
fact, section 706(a)’s legislative history suggests that Congress may have,
somewhat presciently, viewed that provision as an affirmative grant of
authority to the Commission whose existence would become necessary if other
contemplated grants of statutory authority were for some reason unavailable.
The Senate Report describes section 706 as a “necessary fail-safe” “intended to
ensure that one of the primary objectives of the [Act]—to accelerate deployment
of advanced telecommunications capability—is achieved.”
.
As the Commission observed in the Open Internet Order, it would be “odd . . .
to characterize Section 706(a) as a ‘fail-safe’ that ‘ensures’ the Commission’s
ability to promote advanced services if it conferred no actual authority.”
"Of course, we might well hesitate to conclude that Congress
intended to grant the Commission substantive authority in section 706(a) if
that authority would have no limiting principle
,
rejecting Commission’s understanding of its authority that “if accepted . . .
would virtually free the Commission from its congressional tether”. According
to Whitman, under the non-delegation doctrine, “the degree of agency discretion
that is acceptable varies according to the scope of power constitutionally
conferred.”
But we
are satisfied that the scope of authority granted to the Commission by section
706(a) is not so boundless as to compel the conclusion that Congress could
never have intended the provision to set forth anything other than a general
statement of policy. The Commission has identified at least two limiting principles
inherent in section 706(a)
.
First, the section must be read in conjunction with other provisions of the
Communications Act, including, most importantly, those limiting the
Commission’s subject matter jurisdiction to “interstate and foreign communication
by wire and radio
.”
Any regulatory action authorized by section 706(a) would thus have to fall
within the Commission’s subject matter jurisdiction over such communications—a
limitation whose importance this court has recognized in delineating the reach
of the Commission’s ancillary jurisdiction
.
Second, any regulations must be designed to achieve a particular purpose: to
“encourage the deployment on a reasonable and timely basis of advanced
telecommunications capability to all Americans.” 47 U.S.C. § 1302(a). Section
706(a) thus gives the Commission authority to promulgate only those regulations
that it establishes will fulfill this specific statutory goal—a burden that, as
we trust our searching analysis below will demonstrate, is far from “meaningless.”
…..
Sec. 706(b): "Section 706(b) has a less tortured
history. Until shortly before the Commission issued the Open Internet Order, it
had never considered whether the provision vested it with any regulatory
authority. The Commission had no need to do so because prior to that time it
had made no determination that advanced telecommunications technologies,
including broadband Internet access, were not “being deployed to all Americans
in a reasonable and timely fashion,” the prerequisite for any purported
invocation of authority to “take immediate action to accelerate deployment of
such capability” under section 706(b). 47 U.S.C. § 1302(b)....In July 2010,
however, the Commission concluded that “broadband deployment to all Americans
is not reasonable and timely.” Sixth Broadband Deployment Report
,...in
the Open Internet Order the Commission made clear that this statutory provision
does not limit the Commission to using other regulatory authority already at
its disposal, but instead grants it the power necessary to fulfill the statute’s
mandate. See Open Internet Order,. Emphasizing the provision’s “shall take
immediate action” directive, the Commission concluded that section 706(b)
“provides express authority” for the rules it adopted.
Id."
It is clear to iClick2Media that the Legal
Framework for Enforceable Rules of the Road has been grant to the FCC under
section 706. What Congress intended was to ensure all parties in the “Virtuous
Circle of Innovation” were protected and that protection was flexible enough to
grow and meet the needs of all the parties. However because there is no clear
definition of how this need to be achieved just the power to achieve, the FCC
must take all these comments from each of the party and craft a set of guidelines that focuses on
the future growth not just what happening today. iClick2Media in Section
4 (page 10 of the documents) has
created a list of things the FCC should consider when drafting these
guidelines.
a.
The legal framework or foundation that the FCC needs to address is how to balance growth
and authority to maintain innovation under 706 ?
Telecommunication’s has traditionally been a
regulated sector of the US economy. Regulation was imposed in the early part of
this century and remains until today in various parts of the sector
.
The main idea behind regulation was that it
was necessary because the market for telecommunications services was a natural
monopoly, and therefore a second competitor would not survive. Regulation was
imposed to protect consumers from monopolistic abuses.
The overall goal of telecommunications policy is to maximize efficiency
through competition. The logic of
competition and antitrust law in the United States is to guard against
restrictions and impediments to competition that are not likely to be naturally
corrected by competitive forces. As an alternative to antitrust and competition
law, economic regulation have been established in three exceptional case:
i)
for those markets where it is clear that
competition cannot be achieved by market forces;
ii)
where deviation from efficiency is deemed
socially desirable; and
iii)
where the social and private benefits are
clearly different.
In each of these cases, it
is clear that a market without intervention will not result in the desired
outcome. In the first case, this is true
by the definition of the category. In
the second case, markets may lead to efficiency, but society prefers a
different outcome, and intervention is necessary to achieve this. In the third case, maximization of social
surplus does not coincide with maximization of the sum of profits and
consumers’ surplus because of “externalities”.
Therefore the logic is sound however the practical implications have a tendency
to side with Wall Street not Main Street .
This balance of growth will
rest on the language of 706 (b) which states:
…and regularly thereafter, initiate a
notice of inquiry concerning the availability of advanced telecommunications capability
to all Americans (including, in particular, elementary and secondary schools
and classrooms) and …. the Commission shall determine whether advanced
telecommunications capability is being deployed to all Americans in a
reasonable and timely fashion. If the Commission's determination is negative,
it shall take immediate action to accelerate deployment of such capability by
removing barriers to infrastructure investment and by promoting competition in
the telecommunications market.
This being the case, then it is important
that the FCC keeps in mind the growth of broadband, the consumption of
broadband and the creation of content for the consumption will continue to grow
so long as America’s dependency on the broadband grows. Section 706 must not only
address the current state to protect innovation it must also look to the future
and craft guidelines that will grow as well. All the data the necessary is
available for the FCC to use to forecast what the digital market is saying is,
what is occurring between Broadband
provider, Edge provider and End users in the next five years. These guidelines
need to include all these date tools along side the rules granted to ensure
innovation continues.
The FCC must also in setting guidelines
use the power and the authority it has under Title II and III simple because a
vast majority of American use broadband via their mobile devices. Broadband
mobile device in the coming years will be the single most important use of the
Internet because in on the go convenience afford each person in the circle of
innovation access on the go. As more and more shared mobile plans hit the
market more and more Edge providers and End users will rely on that service
verse broadband at home this is especially true for the Rural and Urban
markets.
b.
Seeks comment on the benefits of both Section 706 and Title
II, including the benefits of one approach over the other to ensure the
Internet remains an open platform for innovation and expression.
Because
broadband usage is in the home and on the go the FCC has the greatest
opportunity to create effective guidelines that not only protect innovation but
insure its has the power to do so. By combining the power of 706, Title II and
Title III the FCC is afforded the reasoning and the power granted to it to protect the Openness of the Internet for
years to come. This is only possible because Edge provider rely on the ease
of access viewing its content at home
and or on mobile broadband and End users ability to rely on viewing that content anywhere or
anytime.
4.
Ensure Choices For Consumers And Opportunity For Innovators
a. Proposes a
requirement that all users must have access to fast and robust service:
Broadband consumers must have access to the content, services and applications
they desire. Innovators and Edge providers must have access to End-users so
they can offer new products and services. Therefore the right public policy
needs to take into account several things:
i. That the flow of
information, content and speeds across Broadband providers network remain open
and free with the ability to expand and grow to meet the needs of the Edge
provider and End users
ii. All Edge providers
regardless of it’s owner have access to broadband providers with equal speeds
in getting it’s content out into the marketplace as any one in the pool of
users,
iii. The End users never
suffers viewing any content because speeds have been slowed down for usage and
or because the Broadband provider had limited speeds for Edge provider’s
content.
iv. That the digital
marketplace (the Internet) remains fertile ground where small start-ups, big
media corporation, creative partnerships and Mom & Pop operations can
compete for consumers seeking alternative option for viewing content (Edge) and
the consumer will always have access to a system that require easy access
without barriers to prevent that access
v. If Broadband providers
are going to create fast lanes then those lanes are being created because of
new technology being introduced into the marketplace and that fast lane
creation is more about adoption of technology than it is giving particular
companies and or individuals faster speed and access to content. Remember how
America went from dial-up to broadband or how we went from analog cell phones to 4G, these Fast lanes
should be use when converting from one system to another not designed to give
some Edge providers faster speed. But these so called fast lane could be used
when demand for a particular event is occurring so not to interfere with other
Edge providers content and End users enjoyment. Also these fast lanes could
also be used to meet the needs of End users to prevent systems crashing when
Edge providers demand for content is high (i.e. Oscars, Grammy’s Netflix’s
House of Cards, Orange is the New Black, etc.)
vi. Afford the Broadband
provider the ability to be innovative based on demand not of bottom line/ This
means Broadband should have to have the ability to grow its business as well
meet the needs of changing technology and the demand of End users without
destroying the fertile ground of innovation from Edge provider and new content
application/services. Innovation for all parties in the circle of innovation
must be met. This does not mean that all three parties get what they want but
what the need to survive so each party can continue grow, create and enjoy what
the Internet is and does.
vii. Create check &
balance system like the FCC’s Equal Employment Opportunity Rules and Policy
that ensure diversity employment. This checks & balances should require
Broadband provider to provide information to the FCC on it service, speeds and
customers satisfaction to ensure the Virtuous circle of Innovation is still in
tact. Since the FCC has the right to enforce, “The Commission, we further hold,
has reasonably interpreted section 706 to empower it to promulgate rules
governing broadband providers’ treatment of Internet traffic, and its
justification for the specific rules at issue here — that they will preserve and
facilitate the “virtuous circle” of innovation that has driven the explosive
growth of the Internet — is reasonable and supported by substantial evidence.” iClick2Media believes
the system of checks and balances must come from the FCC and not from and
outside body because the FCC does not has the authority to create such a body.
However the guidelines can be designed in such a way as the FCC has set up its
Equal Employment Opportunity Rules and Policies
viii.
If
Broadband providers become Edge providers those Broadband provider will not
treat its content any different that any other Edge provider content. This
playing of innovation must be open and free if the “Virtuous circle of
innovation”
ix. That the End user never
feel the pinch for innovation or suffer in any way from viewing the content of
its choice because of some deal a Broadband provider gave particular Edge
users.
x. That Edge provider are
given no more access that the other Edge provider even if that Edge provide is
owned by a Broadband provider or acquire an Edge provider unless the demand for
a particular event is occurring and that Edge provider could cause potential
Edge provider and End user interruptions.
xi. And End users are not compromised
because of potential dispute between Broadband providers and Edge providers.
b.
Considers ensuring that
these standards of service evolve to keep pace with of innovation.
i. It has never been a more
important time to know how consumers are behaving than in today’s fast evolving
digital environment. More than ever we need a clear view of what is happening
today and the implications for the coming years. These 11 points mentioned
above are what iClick2Media believes need to be considers for maintaining the
Virtuous Circle of Innovation. According to Nielsen’s 2014 Digital Consumer Report provides insight into what is propelling the new multiscreen, the always
connected consumer lifestyle and how innovation has created demand for
broadband and Edge providers. For most American consumers, their everyday lives
and their digital lives are now wholly intertwined. So much so that in 2013,
the Oxford Dictionary officially codified the term digital detox – “a period of
time during which a person refrains from using electronic devices such as
smartphones or computers…” – by adding it and the definition to its online
version (which ironically, is accessible only via a digital device).
Because of innovation End users have a lot of
devices. A majority of U.S. Households now owns high-definition television
(HDTV), Internet-connected computers and smartphones, and they spend an average
of 60 hours a week consuming content across multiple screens. In additional to
more devices, consumers now have more choices for how and when they access
content. Such as broadband-only delivery of programming and DVR’s for time
shifted viewing.
In particular, the ownership of mobile devices
is revolutionizing the consumer experience with content on the go. This is NOT
a trend it’s a way of life and because of this growth the virtuous circle of
innovation is here to stay.
ii. But the innovation and
service doesn’t stop there it also plays an key role in public institutions,
such as public and school libraries, research libraries, and colleges and
universities that has afforded several generations of student to have the
ability to access information from multiply public libraries, colleges and
universities nation wide. Million of men and women have attend college via an
online education because their lives, families and other responsible will not
allow them to attend a traditional university.
Schools like the University of Phoenix, Capella University, Strayer
University and Arizona State University.
1.
According
to elearning industry eLearning industry Top 10 eLearning
Statistics for 2014 Inforgraphic are:
2.
In
2011 was $35.6 billion. In 2013 it was $56.2 billion and by 2015 it’s going to
double.
3.
Corporation
now report that e-Learning is the second most valuable training method that
they use. This is no surprise, given that e-Learning saves businesses at least
50% when they replace traditional instructor-based training with e-Learning
4.
Today,
it’s estimated that about 4.6 college students are taking at lease one course
on line. However by 2019, roughly half of all college classes will be
eLearning-based
5.
e-Learning
is also Eco-friendly. Recent studies conducted by Britain’s Open University
have found that e-Learning consumes 90% less energy than traditional course.
The amount of CO2 emissions (per student) is also reduced by up to 85%.
6.
Over
41.7% percent of global Fortune 500 companies now use some form of educational
technology to instruct employees during formal learning hours and that figure
is only going to steadily increase in future years. For a more in depth
analysis of e-Learning in the enterprise you may find valuable the Kineo
7.
The
world’s most rapidly growing e-Learning markets are Malaysia and Vietnam, In
fact , the estimated 5 year annual
growth rate for the Asian eLearning markets is 17.3%. That is the highest
compound annual growth of any global region.
8.
According
to a report released by IBM, companies who utilize
e-Learning tools and strategies have the potential to boost productivity by up
to 50%. For every $1 that company spends, it’s estimated that they can receive
$30 worth of productivity.
9.
According
to a recent study conducted by The Research Institute of American, e-Learning has the
power to increase information retention rates by up to 60%.
10.
It’s
been estimated that nearly 25% of all employees leave their jobs because there
simply aren’t enough training or learning opportunities, On the other hand,
companies who do offer e-Learning and on the job training generate about 26%
more revenue per employee.
11.
72%
of companies who were included in a recent survey stated that e-Learning helps
them to keep up to date with changes in their industry, which helps them to
remain competitive within their niche. It was found in a study by Bersin &
Associates that companies and
organizations that did have a strong learning culture did better in their
market than those who do not. For example, these organizations are 46% more
likely to be the leader in their industry note a 34% increase in their ability
to respond to the needs of the customers and 17% more likely to became the
market share leader
The
Standard of Innovation had been set by the End User demand for broadband. Broad
providers have and continue to meet the demands of these end users because the
Edge provider are supplying them multiple options of viewing. Inherently the
End users demand have set the standard of service by forcing the Broadband
provider to evolve to keep pace with Edge provider innovation
c.
In light of the
important role that the Internet now plays as a vehicle for communication of
all sorts—both for consumers and content providers—how should we consider the
potential impact on social and personal expression of an Internet whose
openness was not protected?
i. Social and civic engagements
around issue that matter to the American people all has gain momentum by using
the Internet. One of the greatest campaigns that reach a world wide audience
was and is “It Gets Better” project. In September 2010, syndicated columnist
and author Dan Savage created a YouTube video with his partner Terry Miller to
inspire hope for young people facing harassment. In response more that 50,000
user-created videos viewed more that 50 million times. To date, the project has
received submissions from celebrities,
organization, activists, politicians and media personalities, including
President Barack Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Rep. Nancy Pelosi,
Adam Lambert, Anne Hathaway, Colin Farrell, Matthew Morrison, Joe Joans, Joel
Madden, Ke$ha, Sarah Silverman, Tim Gunn, Ellen DeGeneres, Suze Orman, the
staffs at The Gap, Google, Facebook, Pixar, the Broadway community, and many more. It is believed this
has saved the lives of million of young American dealing with issues that would
lead them to want to commit suicide.
Ensuring choices for consumers will come from how
open the Internet remains. If the Broadband providers do not keep up with the
demand that is driven by the End users then the circle will be broken. If
Broadband providers start to interrupts Edge providers’ opportunity for
innovation the circle is broken. But if Broadband focuses it attention of
demand and innovation the circle can continue to grow at a pace that meets the
needs of all the parties in the circle.
5.
Prevent practices that can threaten the Open Internet
We seek to update the record
underlying the Open Internet Order’s conclusion that broadband providers have
incentives and the economic ability to limit Internet openness in ways that
threaten to weaken or break the virtuous circle.
a.
The
biggest threat that can weaken or breakdown the Virtuous Circle of Innovation
is the ability to slow down speeds of the Edge provider and or End user’s
service. For many Americans, broadband especially mobile broadband getting online
is a daily occurrence. At home, at work and on the go. I have had the
experience of my service with AT&T slowed down because of the amount of
data I was using even though I had an unlimited data pricing plan, a plan that
I had for 6 years (May 08’- June 17). I saw and experience first hand the
effect and the power Broadband providers have and even the incentive to control
the consumers use of the Internet. As an Edge provide and now a mobile
broadcasting network my business suffered several times because my speeds were
slowed or as AT&T says “throttle down”. As a result, my response time to answering
emails, viewing video content, texting clients, family and friends came to a
snail pace. I was unable to use my unlimited data plan to Facetime with my
clients (an AT&T Broadband provider prior bad act) or potential clients in
New York, Atlanta, London, Germany, South Africa and China. My inability to
tether my Mac Book Pro further slowed down the process of my company’s
Innovation because AT&T controlled the system or dictatorship its customers
whom had these unlimited data plan, frustrating the Edge provider and End users
to a point where many including my self had to change plans to meet the needs
of iClick2Media growth and innovation in creating and viewing streaming content. Today’s entrepreneur relies on the Internet
to build its company’s name, gain influence online (being on the first page in
a search on Google, Bing or Yahoo search engine), to communicate with other
professionals and most important build a new client base and or End users. That
can’t happen if the services you are paying for reach a certain point and the
Broadband provider have the ability to slow you down for any reason they dead
reasonable. That’s too much power to have and it’s a true slippery slope for
Broadband providers do slowly destroy the Virtuous Circle of Innovation. Now I
understand if you pay for a certain amount of gig usage and you go over that
amount then I can understand slowing the End users or Edge providers speeds
down but if you are paying for unlimited data plan and they still slow you down
that a big problem and need to be addressed in these new guidelines.
b.
How have changes in the
marketplace or technology since 2010 affected broadband providers incentives
and economic ability to engage in such practices?
So much has happen since
2010. Our consumption of broadband has increased tenfold. American’s are using
broadband more often on multiple screens at the same time (computer,
smartphones and tablets). As this chart indicates the average time spent per
day with the Internet by U.S. adult users online and with what device (between
2010 - 2013) shows a continue
growth and End user usage. The many consumer products entering the marketplace
and becoming more and more cost effective only compound this growth and usage.
With
the growing availability of on demand, self-programming (YouTube, Vine, etc.)
and search features, some experiences are moving beyond niche to individualized
viewing. With increasing competition from convergence players in TV, the
Internet and now Mobile, the industry is confronting unparalleled levels of
complexity, dynamic change and pressure to innovate. According to Richard
Greenfield at BTIG in the first quarter
of 2014 Netflix subscribers watch 4 billion hours of streaming content. 88 percent of
Netflix subscribers are in the U.S. that breaks down to 28.7 million people
watching 87 minutes of streaming per day. iClick2Media analysis indicates that
market evolution (the Future) hinges on two key market drivers: The Openness of
the Internet and most important, the levels of Edge providers and End users
involvement with media. For the next five to seven years, there will be
movement on both of these fronts – but not uniformly. The industry instead will
be stamped by consumer bimodality, a coexistence of two types of users with
disparate channel requirements. While one consumer segment remains largely
passive in the living room, the other has force radical change in business
models in a search for anytime, anywhere content through multiple channels drive
by the Internet. Broadband if not contained by FCC guidelines and or rules
could take full economic advantage of this demand and in its advantage destroy
the Virtuous Circle of Innovation between demand, need and
creation/development.
c. To what extent do broadband providers today have economic
incentives and mechanisms to block or disadvantage a particular edge provider
or class of edge providers?
Broadband
providers have every incentive and the mechanisms to block disadvantage a
particular Edge Provider or class of Edge Provider. Every company wants the
ability to grow its company bigger. Add different products and services that give
them an advantage over the competition (AT&T wanting to purchase DIRECTV
and Comcast-Universal wanting to acquire Time Warner) and create a greater
demand from End Users. The goal for many of these Broadband Providers is to
find way to increase their bottom lines, to make and or cause to be made more
money for the benefit of the stockholders. This economic growth and survival
are based on a simple goal “grab all that you can, where you can and for as
long as you can”. These potential
mergers are more about the future of broadband demands than it is about today’s
innovation.
d.
To what extent do
vertically integrated providers have particularized incentives to
discriminate—on price, quality, or other bases—in favor of affiliated products?
Broadband
providers have every opportunity to fix prices, discriminate against, and decide
the quality of the content that is streaming in favor of those whom will pay
top dollar for better services. The lack of rules is fertile ground for such
bad behavior. The power the Broadband providers have to give preference to some
and not to other is simple a mind set of “whom else will they go to”. The
ability to change service, slow service is all in their hands and the these
vertically integrated providers, the broadband provider prior bad act are the
beginning signs of what their potential or incentive to do what right for their
bottom line not what good for a open playing field for all to benefit from. The
writing is on the wall and the winds of change are coming but should it be at
the destruction of the Virtuous Circle of Innovation? Look at the city of
Detroit after the Virtuous Circle of Innovation was broken.
e.
Proposes the creation of
an ombudsperson with significant enforcement authority to serve as a watchdog
and advocate for start-ups, small businesses and consumers.
iClick2Media
believes this would be a great idea. However unless this Ombudsperson fall
within the FCC guidelines set by Congress, the creation of such a watchdog, an
advocate for start-ups, small businesses and consumers will not be available.
However what could happen is the FCC could created a department similar to the
department that oversees the FCC’s Equal Employment Opportunity Rules and
Policies that would handle complaints, from start-ups, small businesses, Edge
providers and End user to investigate bad behavior of Broadband providers i.e. Something
similar to the EEOC process with dealing with employment discrimination.
f.
Seeks comment on how to
ensure that all parties, and especially small businesses and start-ups, have
effective access to the Commission’s dispute resolution and enforcement
processes.
In
today’s world dispute resolution and enforcement is and will continue to be a
must. For the purpose of the Whitepaper iClick2Media believes the dispute
resolution should be a two prong approach. The first should be the formal
complaint from any of the parties in the broadband food chain. This formal
complaint should be private between the party in the food chain filing the
complaint and the FCC. There should be a series of questions and facts that
show or gives an indication of the particular wrong doing by the Broadband
provider. If the questions are answered and meet a kind of hierarchy of
standards then the FCC will make
inquiries to the Broadband provider being accused of a bad act(s). The
Broadband provide will be able to rebut these allegations and present its facts
based on the same series of questions asked by the complaining party. Once all
the facts have been review the FCC under it authority will provide the appropriate
punishment of the so called bad act. Said bad act will be come public record on
the FCC website for any Edge providers and or End users to review. If the FCC decides there were no bad Act(s)
then it too will become public record for any Edge provider and or Edge user to
review. Now If the Broadband provider commits the same act multiple times then
the FCC can impose fines and sanctions on their bad act(s) behaviors.
g.
Should paid prioritization
be banned outright?
YES. Any such type of prioritization
will cause a break in the foundation of the “Virtuous circle of Innovation”,
and once that is broken it can never be mended.
h.
We seek to update the
record underlying the Open Internet Order’s conclusion that broadband providers
have incentives and the economic ability to limit Internet openness in ways
that threaten to weaken or break the virtuous circle.
The
biggest threat that can weaken or breakdown the virtuous circle is the ability
to slow down speeds of the Edge provider’s End user’s service. For many
broadband especially mobile Broadband provider having the ability to get online
is a daily occurrence and at home , at work and on the go. Because I have had the experience of my company’s
data services slowed down even though I have an unlimited plan I saw the effect
in my response time to answering emails, viewing content that I was interested
in producing and because of their slow down evening texting clients, family and
friends can to a snail pace. Today’s entrepreneur relies on the Internet to
build its company’s name, influence online, to communicate with other
professional and most important build a new client base. That can’t happen if
the services you are paying for reach a certain point and the Broadband
provider has the ability to slow you down. Now I understand if you pay for a
certain about of gig space and you go over that space then I can understand but
if you are paying for unlimited and they still slow you down that a big
problem.
i.
How have changes in the
marketplace or technology since 2010 affected broadband providers incentives
and economic ability to engage in such practices?
So much has happen since
2010. Our consumption of broadband has increased tenfold. American is using
broadband more often on multiple screens at the same time. The as the chart
indicates the average time spent per day with the Internet by US adult Users of
each device between 2010 – 2014. Because demand is so high Broadband Providers
have the ability to price fix forcing the End User to pay the price outside of
Annual Adjustment Factors. The Broadband Provider can implement higher fees for
Edge Providers like Netflix and Hulu because the on the go content is so high,
and because of this potential price hike to Edge Provider any start-up wanting to
get into the marketplace will be forced out before they even get in.
j.
To what extent do
broadband providers today have economic incentives and mechanisms to block or
disadvantage a particular edge provider or class of edge providers?
i. Broadband providers have
every incentive and the mechanisms to block disadvantage a particular Edge
Provider or class of Edge Provider. Every company wants the ability to grow its
company bigger and wider. Add things that gives them an advantage over the
competition (AT&T wanting to purchase DIRECTV and Comcast-Universal wanting
to acquire Time Warner) IF these mergers are allow to happen the Broadband will
have the power to and the mechanisms to help promote their content which give
the Broadband provider a advantage over the Edge Provider both big and small.
ii. The goal for many of
these Broadband Provider is to find way to increase their bottom lines, to make
and or cause to be made more money for the benefit of the stockholders. This
economic growth and survival are keep to keeping the light on for any company
and when you’re a conglomerate it is a necessity for you to grab all that you
can, where you can and for as long as you can. The planed acquisitions by these
two companies are calculated for the future growth not the current growth. The
first AT&T wanting to purchase DIRECTV is clearly to have content for it
Broadband service and Comcast-Universal wanting to acquire Time Warner is the
opposite content rich and will add a greater customer need to broadband.
iii. So say these two mergers
are approve and the Edge provider (content source) and Broadband provider are
one in the same does it make sense the opportunity to squeeze out the
competition of in this case slow the competition down happen naturally because
of the power these particular companies hold over broadband and content?
iClick2Media believes it will we have already seen example of their behavior.
k.
To what extent do
vertically integrated providers have particularized incentives to
discriminate—on price, quality, or other bases—in favor of affiliated products?
Broadband
providers have every opportunity to fix prices, discriminate, and decide the
quality of the content that is streaming in favor of those whom will pay top
dollar for better services. The lack of rules is fertile ground for such
behavior. The FCC has documented previous bad act from Broadband providers. The
power Broadband providers have to give preference to some and non-to other is
simple a mind set of “whom else will they go to”. The ability to change
service, slow service is all in their hands and the these vertically integrated
providers, the broadband provider prior bad act are the beginning signs of what
their potential or incentive to do what right for their bottom line not what
good for a open playing field for all to benefit from.
4.
Expand transparency
a.
To what extent do Broadband
providers today have economic incentives and mechanisms to block or
disadvantage a particular Edge provider or class of Edge providers?
i. Broadband providers have
every incentive and the mechanisms to block or disadvantage a particular Edge
Provider or class of Edge Providers. Every company wants the ability to grow
its company bigger and wider. Add things that gives them an advantage over the
competition (AT&T wanting to purchase DIRECTV and Comcast-Universal wanting
to acquire Time Warner) IF these mergers are allow to happen the Broadband providers
will have the power to and the mechanisms to help promote their Edge content
which gives the Broadband providers a advantage over the Edge Provider both big
and small. The goals for many of these Broadband Providers are to find way to
increase their profits for the benefit of the stockholders. These planed
acquisitions are calculated for the future growth not the current growth. All
the data that has come out since 2010 points to how the End users have change
their habits from sitting at home to watching television to viewing content
online. This growth of broadband End users, show no sign of slowing down. So if
you have the opportunity to get a head of the curve change policy that altered
the Internet, Edge providers and End users behavior knowing what the future of
content viewing is going to look like would it be worth fight for? You bet.
So
say these two mergers are approve and the Edge providers (content source) and
Broadband providers are one in the same doesn’t it make sense given the opportunity
to squeeze out the competition or in this case slow the competition down happen
naturally because of the power these particular companies hold over broadband
and content? iClick2Media believes it will and if Broadband providers Bad Acts
as the FCC states are any indication then the FCC has a duty to do its job and
look at the all data that forecasts the future of content and do all it can to
protect the Virtuous Circle of Innovation.
ii. Enhance the transparency
rules to provide increased and specific information about Broadband providers’
practices for edge providers, consumers.
iii. There needs to be a
clear set of guidelines that protect the End users and well as Edge providers.
Its been established that the FCC can act under Section 706, Title II and
potentially Title III since a large component of this Virtuous Circle of
Innovation is tied to mobile. As stated in Section 4 of this documents
these items should be considered as part
of how to enhance the transparency rules as well fines establish for any violation
that interferes with growth of Internet innovation.
b.
Asks whether Broadband
providers should be required to disclose specific network practices,
performance characteristics (e.g., effective upload and download speeds,
latency and packet loss) and/or terms and conditions of service to end users
(e.g., data caps).
i. Yes, Broadband providers
should be required to disclose specific network practices so long as it does
not interfere with specific trade secrets and or brand. All provider operate
the same way because it they did not Broadband service would not be so
uniformed. Though many device might not work on all networks only because each
device is tuned to the frequency of the provider does not mean the device wont
work it just means it needs to be unlock from the originator of the device system.
ii. Tentatively concludes
that broadband providers should disclose “meaningful information” about the
service, including (1) tailored disclosures to end users, (2) congestion that
may adversely impact the experience of end users, including at interconnection
points, and (3) information about new practices, like any paid prioritization,
to the extent that it is otherwise permitted
iii. Meaning information
needs to be understood by the average consumers. Most meaning information goes
over the average consumers so Broadband providers need to find informative ways
of informing consumers about their service, what might happen sometime, perhaps
an alert when there is a tower down or congestion on the Broadband provider
service. Such information practices will afford the End users the opportunity
to become an active participant in the Virtuous Circle of Innovation not just
and user of broadband.
c.
To what extent do
vertically integrated providers have particularized incentives to
discriminate—on price, quality, or other bases—in favor of affiliated products?
i. Broadband provider have
every opportunity to fix price, discriminate, decide the quality of the content
that is streaming in favor of those whom will pay top dollar for better
services. The lack of rules is fertile ground for such behavior. The power the
Broadband providers have to give preference to some and none to other is a
simple a mindset of “whom else will they go to”. The ability to change service,
slow down service is all in their hands and the these vertically integrated
providers, the Broadband provider prior bad act are the beginning signs of what
their potential or incentive to do the wrong thing when the right thing is to
increase their profits.
d.
What are broadband
providers’ incentives to increase revenues by charging edge providers for
access or prioritized access to the broadband provider’s end users?
i. The incentive is base on
the current market of End Users use of broadband. According to Nielsen A Year In Review: The
average American consumes almost 60 hours of content each week across multiple
screens. 28 hours of that is spent on the computer, 6:20 hours watching videos
on the Internet, 5:31watching videos on a mobile device and 60:02 listening to
Internet radio. End users are the most venerable because of their use where
Broadband provider can pick the pockets of American to increase their profits simple
because of the demand to content and the need to view that content via the
Internet.
e.
What are some economic
incentives and abilities that Broadband providers may have to limit openness.
i. The biggest economic is
DEMAND. Demand for Broadband has no signs of slowing down. A decade ago,
broadband started at 128Kbit/s. In 2014 multiple markets will feature speeds of
over 100 Mbit/s and higher. The steady growth in broadwidth has enable, and
will continue to enable a steady widening of the scope of service than can
migrate online. For example, it is expected faster broadband with help move
aspects of healthcare online, with 100 million eVisits-online medical
interaction-projected to take place in 2014. If this is the case
then it can be assumes that demand will be high and the broadband provider
seeking additional income can make demands from Edge Provider and End User to
pay those fee or accept slower speeds.
f.
Protect consumers,
innovators and startups through new rules and effective enforcement
Edge providers are an important component of
innovation for the growth of the Internet. According to eMarketer
Creative
professionals still prefer to sit down with a pen and paper for most
activities, but mobile devices are reshaping many parts of their jobs.
According to May 2014 polling by Edelman Berland for Adobe 74% of US creative
professionals said that mobile was changing the face of creativity and design.
The study defined creative professionals as those working in a creative
industry such as graphic design, illustration, photography, web design and so
forth.
Creatives’ responses indicated that mobile
gave them the freedom to do their jobs wherever and whenever. When asked how
mobile had changed the creative process, 45% of respondents said it allowed
them to capture inspiration on the go, and 42% said they could create content
anywhere. Interestingly, 41% of respondents noted that the channel helped them
to reach a larger audience—which makes sense given that US consumers continue
to adopt and spend more time with mobile
devices at a rapid pace.
Seven in 10 Creatives reported creating
content from their mobile devices. Mobile websites were the most common type of
platform for which respondents were creating content, cited by 42%. A close 41%
were also working on mobile apps, and 30% said the same for mobile ads.
Nearly nine
in 10 respondents (87%) believed that mobile content was having a positive
effect on creative, with just 8% saying it had a negative impact, suggesting
that mobile usage is facing an even brighter future in the industry.
Today’s End users i.e. consumers, are more connected that
ever, with more access to and deeper engagement with content and brands, thanks
to the proliferation of digital device and platforms. Content that was once
only available to consumers via specific methods of delivery (such as via
print, radio and broadcast television) can now be sourced and delivered to
consumers through their multiple connected devices. This is driving the media
revolution and blurring traditional media definitions.
Obtaining information via the Internet drives
all the way we communicate, acquire information and form perspective. We have
become an engaging multi-device user in those pursuits. For example online
video viewing and TV Everywhere authenticated video is being led by mobile
devices, gaming consoles, and OTT (Over The Top) devices as broadcasters,
pay-TV services provider, and advertisers look for ways to engage the
multi-device consumer. To meet the needs of these demanding views, who are
watching more video online than ever before, media and entertainment companies
must understand the trends. Equipped with the latest insight, they can improve
content, sell targeted ads and get better results
For may years since the dawn of Internet has a life chain that
one can live with out the other and each needs each other in order to survive.
However with changing behaviors from Broadband providers to Edge provider to
End users innovation must continue happen if the needs and the demands are to
be met. The right public policy needs to take into account several things:
i. That the flow of
information across Broadband provider remain open and free
ii. All Edge providers are
allow to have equal access to getting its content out into the marketplace as
any one in the pool of Edge providers
iii. The End users never
suffers viewing any content because speeds have been slowed down for usage and
or because the Broadband provider had limited speeds for Edge provider’s
content because of End user demand for Edge providers’ content
iv. Afford the Broadband
provider the ability to be innovative not selective
v. Have a system of check
& balance to ensure the Broadband provider are not giving themselves and
other Edge priority status simply whom willing to pay a higher fee status
vi. That the End user never
fee the pinch for innovation or suffer being able to view the content of its
choice because of some deal a Broadband provider gave particular Edge users.
vii. That Edge provider are
given no more access that the other Edge provider even if that Edge provide is
owned by a Broadband provider or acquire an Edge provider.
viii.
End
users whom are paying for the Broadband service has access to any Edge provider
without buffering, interruption, or other issue (so long as it not service
related)
ix. Finally would
iClick2Media like to see is a system that allows for the expansion of
technology (Broadband); That the digital marketplace (the Internet) remains
fertile ground where small start-ups, big media corporation, creative
partnerships and Mom & Pop operations can compete for consumers seeking
alternative option for viewing content (Edge) and the consumer will always have
access to a system that require easy access without barriers to prevent that
access.
Proponents of net neutrality or to use the
Commission’s preferred term, “Internet openness” - worry about the relationship
between broadband providers and edge providers. They fear that broadband
providers might prevent their end-user subscribers from accessing certain edge
providers altogether, or might as a means of favoring their own competing
content or services or to enable them to collect fees from certain edge
providers
. The
problem rests with the relationship between Broadband Providers and Edge
providers. For many of the Broadband companies, their creation of content has
become a part of their business model. The choice of where content come from
has also complicated
the landscape
because the advent of “cord-cutters”. More the 12 million End users and growing
have cut the cord to cable and now view content via Broadband. In the Open
Internet Order, the Commission specifically, found that the Internet openness
enables a “Virtuous circle of innovation in which new users of the network -
including new content application, services and devices-lead to increase End-users
demand for broadband which drives network improvements, which in turn leads to
further innovative network uses
.
This type innovation and digital entrepreneurialism is what has made this
country a beacon of light for so many and the goal should be how to find the
right balance where all parties get what the NEED not what they WANT.
What iClick2Media would like to see and or
suggest in the policy is a fair solution where Broadband keep innovating its
services without creating a Jim Crow type of environment; where big corporation
such as Netflix, Hulu, Amazon and or Broadband Edge provider are give no better
speeds for their content than a small start-up are given access. The battle for
an Open Internet as iClick2Media see’s it is how to keep the Broadband provider
honest, open and fair, not what they think is honest, open and fair but what
the Edge provider and End users concept of honest, open and fair. Broadband
corporation will make claims that it not fair to them to not be able to control
its service because they are in the business of making money, where the End
users who support these corporation want services that is fast and easily
available. But the simple answer is for the FCC to use it authority and craft
guidelines that reflect the needed protection, flexibility and future growth
g.
What is the current role of the Internet’s openness in
facilitating innovation, economic growth, free expression, civic engagement,
competition, and broadband investment and deployment?
From the moment it happen a generation or men and
women were given their own opportunity to have their own type of industrial
revolution. During the dot COM era,
millions began to adapt to the new way of thinking and communicating,
email. As we settled into a new way of
thinking, communicating and doing business, several products came into the
marketplace that help and enhanced our use of the World Wide Web. It was clear
this was the way of the future and we all need to get on board.
Two of the greatest success stories are iTunes and EBay. iTunes change
how we listen and buy music, and EBay created the new garage. These two
business models gave entrepreneur the ability to become their own bosses, to
have a voice and the means to meet like-minded people all being connected by
the Web.
Today’s
consumer is more connected than ever, with more access to and deeper engagement
with content and brands, thanks to the proliferation of digital devices and
platforms. Content that was once only available to consumers via specific
methods of delivery (such as via print, radio and broadcast television) can now
be sourced and delivered to consumers through their multiple connected devices.
This is driving the media revolution and blurring traditional media definitions.
To put it simply, today’s consumer has
a lot of digital devices. A majority of U.S. households now own
high-definition televisions (HDTVs), Internet- connected computers and
smartphones, and they spend an average of 60 hours a week consuming content
across multiple screens. In addition to
more devices, consumers now have more choices for how and when they access
content, such as broadband-only delivery of programming and DVRs for
time-shifted viewing. In particular, the
ownership of mobile devices is revolutionizing the consumer shopping experience.
Increasingly, consumers are relying on mobile devices to research potential
purchases and compare prices for goods and services. As U.S. consumers continue
to take advantage of the convenience of anytime, anywhere browsing and shopping
via their smartphones and tablets, there is a huge opportunity for retailers
and brands to capture the full path-to-purchase.
Social media usage is now standard practice in our
daily lives. Almost two-thirds (64%) of overall social media users say they
use social media sites at least once a day via their computer, and almost half (47%) of smartphone owners visit
social networks every day. With the rapid adoption of mobile devices,
social media has a symbiotic relationship with the mobile consumer. And social
has played a pivotal role, empowering consumers by providing a direct point of
contact with the brands they use and the content they access.
Because
of the openness of the Internet the consumer or the end user has had the
greatest benefit. According the Nielsen,
the rapid adoption of a second screen
has transformed the traditional TV viewing experience. Consumers are
using smartphones and tablets in ways that are natural extensions of the
programming they watch, like looking up information about the characters and
plot lines, or researching and purchasing products and services advertised just
minutes before. Using social media to engage with other viewers has also
transformed the live viewing experience for millions of consumers across the
country.
According to the Telecommunication competition: the
infrastructure-investment race
key findings:
i. U.S. communications
traffic has almost completed the transition to Internet Protocol (IP). Legacy
switched traffic amounts to less than 1% of IP traffic today and is likely to
decrease to a small fraction of 1% by 2017. The regulatory framework, has not
caught up to the marketplace reality.
ii. The development of
multiple platforms, which provide transport for IP, has helped create a highly
competitive communication ecosystem, which provides consumers a plethora of
choices.
iii. As a result, consumers
no longer have to fit into a “one-size-fits-all” mode. Each consumer can pick
and choose among different bundles of networks/devices/content-application
services to find the best fit for that individual .
iv. Those choices are provided over various platforms
that compete with each other on the basis of different technology capabilities
and different economics. Tat makes the competition sustainable. It also makes
the variety of choices possible.
v. The greatest benefits of
the Telecommunication Act of 1996
have resulted from inter-platform competition, while attempts at artificially
induced intra-platform competition have failed.
vi. The least-regulated
platforms-Internet, cable, and wireless—are the most successful, because they
have been free to innovate and to invest their capital efficiently . The
most-regulated-the incumbent telephone companies (ILECSs) – Have been forced to
waste both capital and operating funds on obsolete networks, thus limiting
their ability to upgrade their infrastructure.
vii. A team led by Robert C.
Atkinson of CITI estimated that from 2006 through 2011, 53% of the capital
investment made by the three largest ILECs was allocated to their legacy
network, while just 47% was spent on broadband infrastructure. Assuming that
ratio is typical of the industry during those six years, and given that ILEC
industry spent $154 billion in capes during those years, The ILECs spent $81
billion on legacy networks, while just $73 billon was spent on modern broadband
infrastructure.
viii.
The
ILECs are losing circuit-switched voice and low speeds DSL subscribers. On the
other hand, where they have deployed IP over fiber-based infrastructure, they
are gaining Internet-access and video subscribers.
ix. To enhance competition
and achieve the world-leading role in broadband-access that Congress and the
Administration desire, the U.S. IP transition must be completed and the ILECs
must be allow to repurpose the capital that is currently deployed to support
their obsolete circuit-switch networks into fiber based broadband IP networks.
These 9 examples show innovation to ensure
service from the Broadband provider to Edge user and End user are met. As a result of facilitating innovation,
economic growth, free expression, civic engagement are Hispanic. U.S. Hispanics
make up the fastest growing population segment and Mobile broadband users.
Nielsen expects this group to contribute to 60 percent of the U.S. population
growth in the next three years use of broadband. They spend more time consuming
digital video than the national U.S. average, and they are adopting smartphones
at a much quicker rate. As an important and growing consumer segment, Hispanic digital consumers are poised to be
even more influential in the coming years. The openness of the Internet has
allowed this segment of the population digital divide to slowly close. The
Internet openness has afforded the Hispanic market access and because of
current openness of the Internet mobile broadband growth for Hispanic has been
able to keep pace with the current growth of use and innovation.
h.
New business
arrangements in the market between Broadband providers and Edge providers.
Traditionally, relationships in business have a
linear supply and demand nature (1:1): products or services are delivered in
one direction and money returns in the opposite. In the economic theory of
two-sided markets, the value flow is made possible by a platform between two
different markets. If one side of the market grows, it influences the other
side of the market positive--the so-called network effect. For example, the
more consumers are using a specific gaming platform, the more game developers
will create games for that gaming platform, which in turn attracts more gamers.
There are various other successful examples such as credit card platforms
(linking the merchants and customers) and broadcasters (linking the advertisers
and consumers).
i.
What does the
multi-sided market look like, and what are its effects on Internet openness?
Information-based platforms can develop the concept
of two-sided markets into multi-sided markets; collecting data-through
transactional and social platforms creates for stakeholders multiple use cases
in the same information domain. These platforms are able to cross-link
contextual data coming from different market sides and create value from such
linkage. This theory is applied in social networks, where consumers are not
charged for the service, but the platform reuses consumer’s personal data on an
anonymous aggregated or individualized basis. These platforms often evolve into
value networks or ecosystems in which one business at one side of the market
stimulates the business at another market side by sharing information and,
eventually, the customer base. The upside is that trust can be built slowly,
step by step, as more and more information is shared. The downside is that
trust and the entire new value can be destroyed by a single unwanted privacy
violation of consumer or business data. Market participants have to be aware
that they have a responsibility to protect the information being provided in
order to maintain the ecosystem. These value ecosystems will not only influence
the collaboration between the competitors in the same market, but will also
force a cross-sector collaboration based on shared information. Multi-sided
markets will transform into what we call ‘multi-purpose transaction systems
.
j.
Do some types of Broadband
and Edge provider arrangements (or aspects of such arrangements) raise greater
concerns about Internet openness than others?
YES they do. Any special relationship that affords an
Edge provider more bandwidth than any other Edge provides begins the slipper
slope of unfair treatment of other Edge provider who are in and or new the
marketplace, who may not have the same cash flow as say a Netflix or Hulu to
compete with and because of those arrangements can have serious implication of
censorship for content that which is like and or similar to those whom have
arrangements with broadband provide. iClick2Media as an Edge provider and now
start-up content distributor believes the current state of the Internet has and
can continue to be a place where small start-up can thrive and build many
opportunities for entrepreneurs. If the FCC grants the right to broadband
providers to broker deals with larger edge provider who can afford to have
special lanes for their content to be streamed on then the intent of what the
Internet was supposed to be will never be. The freedom of movement is
quintessential when people want to share ideas, experience and causes. Giving
the power of broadband to create special deals will seriously alter to digital
fundamental freedom that Americans have come to know and rely on.
Broadband Providers have the Incentive and ability to
limit Openness because they then can make demands for high fees that limits people’s
ability to have access to the Internet. For many American if not most rely of
the Internet in two locations, at home and on their mobile devices. According
the Open Internet Order found that broadband Internet providers had the
incentives and ability to limit Internet openness, and that they had done so in
the past.
Such proof of bad acts & control
are for example Verizon $ 1.25 million settlement for refusing tethering
,
AT&T refusal to permit Apple’s Face time on iPhones & iPads application
to use its s mobile network,
and
AT&T has slowed down end users speeds who had unlimited data plan when they
reached a certain point attempting frustrate End User
in hopes they would change their plans.
As the D.C. Circuit found that the Commission
“adequately supported and explained” that absent open Internet rules,
“broadband providers represent a threat to Internet openness and could act in
ways that would ultimately inhibit the speed and extent of future broadband
deployment.”
k.
We seek to update the
record to reflect marketplace, technical, and other changes since the 2010 Open
Internet Order was adopted that may have either exacerbated or mitigated Broadband
providers’ incentives and ability to limit Internet openness.
The
world has become a very different place since 2010. In 2010 there were
300,520,098
by the
end of 2014 the number of active cell phones will reach 7.3 billion by 2014
.
End users rely on the mobile devices in every aspect of their live. According
to Nielsen
here are some of our surprising
findings:
·
YouTube: some 40%
of YouTube's traffic now comes from mobile. Compare that to just 25% last year
and a paltry 6% only two years ago.
·
Audience
Boom: About 50 million people in the U.S. now watch video on their mobile
phones. Fifteen percent of all online video hours globally are viewed on
tablets and smartphones.
·
Machinima
is one of the most-watched YouTube channels in the world. The channel,
focused on video and computer gaming, has a global audience of 200 million
people. HBO, by comparison has roughly 30 million subscribers.
·
Netflix:
Netflix widely went with an iPad app first, not a smartphone app. Today,
a reported 23% of all Netflix subscribers say they have watched on
smartphones, and 15% have done so on iPads.
·
Bandwidth
hogs: One-third of all home broadband Internet traffic in
the U.S. is generated by Netflix videos. YouTube accounts for nearly one-fifth
of all mobile data traffic.
·
VEVO:
The music video platform's mobile and TV app audience exploded by 184% this
year. Half of its views are from mobile.
·
Amazon:
The company has about 16.7 million Prime subscribers that get unlimited video
A
longitudinal study by Nielsen of US Smartphone subscribers’ use of rich media
found across-the-board increases in activities such as Internet use, app
downloads, and game downloads, streaming music and video/mobile TV viewing as
shown by this chart:
Another
example of how the market has changed since 2010 is the connected TV audience
is still in a nascent stage, but the number of individuals in the US who use
the Internet through a connected TV at least once per month is growing rapidly.
eMarketer
estimates that more than 113 million people—35.5% of the US population and
45.0% of Internet users—will use a connected TV regularly this year, and in
2015, the majority of US Internet users will access the Internet through such a
device. The connected TV audience will post double-digit growth rates through
2017.
Falling
prices of smart TVs, combined with the increasing popularity of set-top
devices—such as Apple TV, Roku, Google Chromecast, Amazon Fire and connected
video game consoles—and ever-expanding streaming content options, will help
drive audience growth. eMarketer defines connected TVs as sets hooked up to the
internet through any means, including a built-in network connection or a
third-party device such as a game console, set-top box, or laptop. eMarketer
has raised its forecast for connected TV users in the US from its January 2014
projections based on new comparative data, expected releases of new smart TV
and set-top box models in the coming years, and falling price points of these
devices.
Smart
TVs are defined more narrowly as sets with built-in Internet capability.
eMarketer forecasts that the number of US smart TV users will reach 49.8
million in 2014, or 15.6% of the population and 19.8% of Internet users. Growth
will be in the double digits through 2016. This is slightly lower than
eMarketer’s January 2013 forecast, due to new comparative data.
Due to an
increasing number of consumers accessing TV, movies and other video content via
set-top devices, gaming consoles and Blu-ray devices, the share of smart TV
users as a percentage of connected TV users will decrease slightly between 2014
and 2018, while the portion of smart TV non-users will rise. This year, smart
TV non-users will account for 56.0% of connected TV users. By 2018, this will
grow slightly to reach 58.8%. This will be iClick2Media sweet spot. Our content
is geared towards the individual who want something different, new, exciting,
the thing they can’t get on TV (i.e. House of Cards, Orange is The New Black.
Etc.). This type of television set will give our consumers the first screen
option they know with their second screen option they love. Our use of broadband has grown and will
continue to grow. The demand for access will reach new levels as new, cheaper
products reach the market place in the coming years. If the Internet does nor
keep it current openness and some other form is allowed to take it place the
individual that suffers the most is the American public, Edge provider who are
a part of that public and the only one that wins are the corporation who are
afforded large fees
l.
We seek general comment
on the Commission’s approach to analyzing Broadband providers’ incentives and
ability to engage in practices that would limit the open Internet, as well as
more targeted comment as addressed below.
As both an End user and Edge
Provider now Edge distributor I have first hand experience of the power
Broadband provides have over the End users. I have been a customer of AT&T
for 14 years. From April 2008 through June 8, 2014 I had an advertised plan
that offered me unlimited phone, text and data.
As a consumer my assumption
was defined by the word
UNLIMITED which
is defined by Merriam-Webster
dictionary
as (1) lacking any control
(2) Boundless, infinite
(3) not bound by exception undefined < the
unlimited and unconditional surrender of the enemy. However this definition was
not the case. On several occasion AT&T purposefully throttled my services
down. As an Edge provider and End User my job requires me to view other content
on other sites and seek out content for potential production on my mobile
second screen application. Each time my speeds were slowed I was told I
had to wait until the next billing cycle for them to be returned to the normal
speed that I had become accustom to and had to pay the same price but not get
the same service. Now think if this was happening to me how many other cord
cutters
what it happening too? These Broadband
providers have the ability to slow, stop and or disrupt Edge Providers and End
Users speeds and use of their service. There need to be an accountable of the
broadband provider that protect the fluidness of the Internet while controlling
the way Broadband provider
In the absence of such rules and policies,
commenters note more instances of Broadband providers engaging in some level of
restriction in Europe than the Commission has witnessed in the United States
under its open Internet policies.
For example,
a survey conducted by the Body of European Regulators for Electronic
Communications (BEREC) shows that European Internet service providers reported
engaging in specific restrictions such as traffic degradation as well as
blocking and throttling when accessing “specific applications (such as gaming,
streaming, e-mail or instant messaging service) and, to a much lesser extent,
when [accessing] specific content and application providers.”
These two examples should show how Broadband providers’ are incentivizes and
have ability to engage in practices that would limit the open Internet
m.
We seek comment on this
analysis and ask whether there is some other explanation to account for this
phenomenon
What we are now seeing now is such a large growth
broadband users. Consumers have moved away from the traditional way content has
be view in the past and now rely on other devices to view content. Broadband company now more than ever have to
change their behavior because of our reliance on other devices to view content
that streams via the Internet now more than ever have the incentive to slow
speeds of the End Users to force the Edge providers to pay a higher price if
that want their content to have the ability to continue being view by the End
User or offer the End User an content alterative that the Broadband company may
own or brokered a deal with an Edge Provider for an exclusive space and speed.
In a study by eMarketer
looked at the past present and future viewership of digital content. According
to this chart online viewership continues to climb in spite of the economy.
US Online Video Viewers, 2010 - 2015
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
2014
|
2015
|
Online
Viewers (millions)
|
145.6
|
158.1
|
169.3
|
178.7
|
187.6
|
195.5
|
-%
change
|
11.3%
|
8.6%
|
7.1%
|
5.6%
|
5.0%
|
4.2%
|
-
% of population
|
46.9%
|
50.5%
|
53.5%
|
56.5%
|
58.2%
|
60.1%
|
-%
of internet users
|
65.0%
|
68.2%
|
70.8%
|
72.9%
|
74.7%
|
76.0%
|
This opportunity that has been created by the End
Users demands in any other market would be a coup d’état. But because
the
FCC was created for the purpose of regulating interstate and foreign commerce
in communication by wire and radio so as to make available to all the people of
the United States, without discrimination on the basis of race, color,
religion, national origin, or sex, a rapid, efficient, nationwide, and
world-wide wire and radio communication service with adequate facilities at
reasonable charges, for the purpose of the national defense, for the purpose of
promoting safety of life and property through the use of wire and radio
communication, and for the purpose of securing a more effective execution of
this policy by centralizing authority heretofore granted by law to several
agencies and by granting additional authority with respect to interstate and
foreign commerce in wire and radio communication
must take a stand and protect the voices of the American whom are voiceless and
to prevent discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national
origin, or sex. The solution is a simple one with complications having the
power as per the blueprint offered by the D.C. Circuit in its decision in Verizon v FCC, the Commission proposes
to rely on section 706 of the Telecommunication Act of 1996.
The FCC must ensure that speeds of the Internet between the Broadband provider
to the Edge Provider to the End Users are equal across the board regardless of
the Edge Provider is. There should be no special deals and or treatment to any
party in the content food chain that could limit another Edge Provider ability
to have its content view. Second if Broadband providers are allowed to create
special Edge provide lanes Edge provider will have to succumb to the pricing
and will of the Broadband companies if the want to compete in the market place.
7. Consider the Impact on the Digital Divide: Ensuring access for all
communities
Telecommunication,
which in theory should bind us together, has often divided us in practice.
Until the late 20
th century, the divide split those with phones and
those without it. Then it was the web: in 1995 the Commerce Department
published its first look at the “digital divide,” finding stark racial,
economic and geographic gaps between those who get online and those who could
not
The overall
goal of telecommunications policy is to maximize efficiency through
competition.
The logic of competition and antitrust law in the United States is
to guard against restrictions and impediments to competition that are not likely
to be naturally corrected by competitive forces. As an alternative to antitrust
and competition law, economic regulation has been established in three
exceptional case: (i) for those markets where it is clear that competition
cannot be achieved by market forces; (ii) where deviation from efficiency is
deemed socially desirable; and (iii) where the social and private benefits are
clearly different. In each of these
cases, it is clear that a market without intervention will not result in the
desired outcome. In the first case, this
is true by the definition of the category.
In the second case, markets may lead to efficiency, but society prefers
a different outcome, and intervention is necessary to achieve this. In the third case, maximization of social
surplus does not coincide with maximization of the sum of profits and
consumers’ surplus because of “externalities”
a.
Fact & Figures About America
People of Color
There's no question the U.S. population is shifting and the U.S. Census
report is forecasting that White people will become a minority in the US by
2043
Minorities,
now roughly one-third of the U.S. population, are expected to become the
majority in 2042, with the nation projected to be 54 percent minority in 2050. What will it look like:
·
By 2023,
minorities will comprise more than half of all children.
·
In 2030,
when all of the baby boomers will be 65 and older, nearly one in five U.S.
residents are expected to be 65 and older. This age group is projected to
increase to 88.5 million in 2050, more than doubling the number in 2008 (38.7
million).
·
Similarly,
the 85 and older population is expected to more than triple, from 5.4 million
to 19 million between 2008 and 2050.
·
By 2050,
the minority population — everyone except for non-Hispanic, single-race whites
— is projected to be 235.7 million out of a total U.S. population of 439
million. The nation is projected to reach the 400 million-population milestones
in 2039.
·
The non-Hispanic,
single-race white population is projected to be only slightly larger in 2050
(203.3 million) than in 2008 (199.8 million). In fact, this group is projected
to lose population in the 2030s and 2040s and comprise 46 percent of the total
population in 2050, down from 66 percent in 2008.
·
Meanwhile,
the Hispanic population is projected to nearly triple, from 46.7 million to
132.8 million during the 2008-2050 period. Its share of the nation’s total
population is projected to double, from 15 percent to 30 percent. Thus, nearly
one in three U.S. residents would be Hispanic.
·
The black
population is projected to increase from 41.1 million, or 14 percent of the
population in 2008, to 65.7 million, or 15 percent in 2050.
·
The Asian
population is projected to climb from 15.5 million to 40.6 million. Its share
of the nation’s population is expected to rise from 5.1 percent to 9.2 percent.
·
Among the
remaining race groups, American Indians and Alaska Natives are projected to
rise from 4.9 million to 8.6 million (or from 1.6 to 2 percent of the total
population).
·
The Native
Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander population is expected to more than double,
from 1.1 million to 2.6 million.
· The number of people who identify
themselves as being of two or more races is projected to more than triple, from
5.2 million to 16.2 million.
According
to a Nielsen Hispanic consumers are digital
trailblazers. In the US Hispanic make up the fastest growing population
segment and Nielsen expects this group to contribute to 60 percent of the US
Population in the next three years. They spend more time consuming digital
video than the national average, and they are adopting smartphone at a much
quicker rate. As an important and growing consumer segment, Hispanic digital
consumers are poised to be even more influential in the coming years. The
closing of the digital divide is happening not because Latinos own smartphones,
go online from a mobile device and use social networking sites at a similar-and
sometimes higher-rates than so other groups of Americans, according to an new
analysis of three surveys by Pew Research Center. The analysis
also finds that when it comes to Internet, the digital divide between
Latino and whites is smaller than what it had been just a few years ago. Between
2009 and 2012, the share of Latino adults who say they go online at least
occasionally increased 13percentage point, rising from 64% to 78%.
b.
Technology Adoption and Going
Online
When
it come down to owning a smartphone, going online from mobile devices and using
social networking sites, Latinos are just as connected as if not more than
other Americans. According to the Pew Research analysis.
Cellphone ownership: Fully 86% of Latinos are just as
likely as Whites or Blacks to own a cellphone, a share similar to that of
Whites (84%) and Blacks (90%)
Smartphone Ownership: Among adults, Latinos are just as
likely as Whites and Black to own a smartphone -49% versus 46% and 50%
Going Online from a Mobile Device: Latino
Internet users are more likely than White Internet users to say they go online
using a mobile devide-75% versus 60%. Meanwhile, Latino and Black Internet
users are equally likely to access the Internet from a mobile device -76% and
73% respectively.
Social Networking Site Use: Among Internet users, similar
shares of Latinos (68%), Whites (66%) and (69%) say they use social networking
sites like Twitter and Facebook at least occasionally.
While Latinos use mobile and social
networking technologies at a rate similar to those of other groups, they lag behind
Whites when it comes to owning a desktop computer or accessing the Internet
(with or without a mobile device.
Computer Ownership: Some 72% of laptop computer,
compared with 83% of Whites, Among Blacks, 70% are a Computer owner
Internet Use: Nearly eight-in-ten (78%) Latino adults
go online at least occasionally, compared with 87% of Whites and 78% Blacks.
Access
to a public library allows people to explore educate and acquire knowledge for
free. The Internet does the same thing with the exception of it being free
(unless you use the public library). American has not been the greatest place
when it comes to its history of race relations. But the openness of the Internet
has afforded what is to come of this country FIRST REAL SPACE FOR DIVERSITY.
c.
If the Internet were to change,
what impact would it have on groups who disproportionately use mobile broadband service.
As a minority business, a digital distribution start-up and Edge provider
if the internet were to change the hardest hit would be minority small Edge
business, and End users. Traditionally the economic scale in America has always
been disproportionate which leads to many American unable to afford equipment
to connect to the Internet. However the solution for many American minorities
are family share plans that include phone, text and data. These plans for
example AT&T’s Family Share Plan
,
Sprint’s Unlimited Family Plan
and T-Mobile The Simple Choice Plan
have give minorities End Users three things; (1) telephone service, (2) texting
ability to communicate and share content links and (3) the ability to surf the
internet and explore new worlds, gain insight on a topics, do homework and do
it all on the go. If the internet as we know it were to change all these plans
would have to change as well because Broadband companies would now have the
ability to create new fees for such service and perhaps charge a higher price
for said services which would cause income challenge families limited, if any
access to the internet.
I predict that Broadband in the home will soon have the same issues as
cable television is currently experiencing with Cord Cutter. Cord Cutters as
define by The Nielsen Co., are individuals whom have stopped paying for cable
and satellite TV service, and don't even use an antenna to get free signals
over the air. These groups of people are watching shows and movies on the
Internet, sometimes via mobile phone connections (tethering). This group
"Zero TV" households
(and today’s mobile broadband users ) are called this because they fall outside
the traditional definition of a TV home. There are 10 million of these
residences in the U.S., up from 2 million in 2007.
d. The Black/White “digital divide” continues to persist, but is not
consistent across technology platforms or demographic groups.
The digital divide between Blacks and Whites may be more a
function of class than race, according to a new Pew Research Center survey.
The study, entitled “African Americans and Technology Use”
and released Jan. 6, found that at the same income levels, there is little
discernable difference in Internet use and adoption between African Americans
and Caucasian Americans.
Young, college-educated, and
higher-income African-Americans mirror Whites of a similar demographic profile
in the use of the Internet and the availability of broadband service at home.
At least 86 percent of Blacks ages 18-29 are home broadband adopters, as are 88
percent of Black college graduates and 91 percent of African Americans with an
annual household income of $75,000 or more per year.
“These figures are all well above the national average for
broadband adoption, and are identical to Whites of similar ages, incomes, and
education levels,” the report stated.
Social networks are
a major draw for African-Americans in cyberspace, particularly younger users.
Overall, 73 percent of African-American Internet users—and 96 percent of those
ages 18-29—use a social networking site of some kind. Twitter is particularly
popular—22 percent of online Blacks are Twitter users, compared with 16 percent
of online Whites.
The picture is very different
among older, non-college educated African-Americans, who are significantly less
likely to go online or to have broadband service at home compared to their
White counterparts. African-Americans age 65 and older has especially low
Internet adoption rates compared with Whites; a mere 45 percent of Black
seniors use the Web, and 30 percent have broadband at home. Among White
seniors, 63 percent go online and 51 percent are broadband adopters.
Analyzed together, the survey showed that the digital
divide between Whites and Blacks persists, particularly when it comes to
traditional means of Internet access. In all, 87 percent of Whites have
traditional means of Internet access compared to 80 percent of Blacks. When it
comes to home broadband adoption, 74 percent of Whites have some sort of
broadband connection at home, compared to 62 percent of Blacks.
However, mobile technologies are helping to bridge the gap.
Overall, 72 percent of all African Americans—and 98 percent of those between
the ages of 18 and 29—have either a broadband connection or a smartphone.
Blacks and Whites are equally likely to own any cell phone, including
smartphones. About 92 percent of Black adults are cell phone owners, and 56
percent own a smartphone of some kind. While older African Americans trail
others in Internet use, they are more likely to own a cell phone. While only 45
percent of African Americans ages 65 and older use the Internet, 77 percent are
cell phone owners—only 18 percent, however, own smartphones.)
This report on African Americans and technology is the
first in a series of demographic snapshots of how technology has permeated
different groups of adults in the United States. It was based on a survey of
6,010 American adults, including 664 who identify as African American.
Advocates have long championed policies to close the
digital split between different communities, saying the disparity affects rates
of literacy and education, political influence, development and more.
e.
If the change were to
take, asks whether any parts of the nation are being left behind in the
deployment of new broadband networks, including rural America and parts of
urban America.
Yes part of
rural American and urban America would left behind because the power of pricing
would change that would have a direct effect on mobile phone service and cost,
it would force the gap the digital divide gap open because all the people
connected to Broadband service would feel the pain having to charge high price
which ends up being paid by the End Users, If you compare the effect on the
housing market
9. Conclusion
Innovation
is the key to all things. This country has been built on the sprit of entrepreneurism.
It’s that sprit, which has allowed the start-up to become giant in industry. The
current state of the Internet does need improvement not for today but for years
to come. It is important that the Virtuous Circle of Innovation stays in tact but
has enough room to grow. As stated above Broadband has been able to expand with
creating fast lanes or giving one Edge provider faster speeds than the other
but that does not mean it will way be that way. As demand rises so will
Broadband need to make bugger profit and without a solid set of rules the
Internet as we know will slowly disappear like 8 tracks, albums, analog phones,
palm pilot and dial up. As and Edge provider and mobile digital distributor it
is important to my business growth to have an Open Internet for Innovation. It
is my hopes that the FCC in its wisdom will listen to the millions of American
that want to keep the Internet as it with the ability to grow as demand does.
Preserving the Open Internet, GN Docket No. 09-191, WC
Docket No. 07-52, Report and Order, 25 FCC Rcd 17905, 17910, para. 13 (2010)
(Open Internet Order or Order), aff’d in part, vacated and remanded in part sub
nom. Verizon v. FCC, 740 F.3d 623 (D.C. Cir. 2014). Among other examples, the
Commission cited Sir Tim Berners-Lee, who—25 years ago—needed neither
permission nor approvals from network operators to invent the World Wide Web
using existing Internet layer and transport protocols. Id.
Preserving the Open Internet, GN Docket No. 09-191, WC
Docket No. 07-52, Report and Order, 25 FCC Rcd 17905, 17910, para. 13 (2010)
(Open Internet Order or Order), aff’d in part, vacated and remanded in part sub
nom. Verizon v. FCC, 740 F.3d 623 (D.C. Cir. 2014). Among other examples, the
Commission cited Sir Tim Berners-Lee, who—25 years ago—needed neither
permission nor approvals from network operators to invent the World Wide Web
using existing Internet layer and transport protocols. Id.
Verizon v. FCC D.C.
Cir. Jan. 14, 2014
Dissenting
Op. at 7. “Verizon Slip at
24-27 (D.C. Cir. 2014).
See, e.g., Public Knowledge and Common Cause
Comments 4-7 (stating that data caps limit Internet openness).
See infra paras. 96, 126, 138.
Open Internet Order, 25 FCC Rcd at 17915-26, paras.
20-37.
Verizon Fined $1.25 Million for Blocking Android Tethering Apps By
Michelle Maisto Posted 2012-07-31
Verizon, 740 F.3d at 645.
Digital Trends - Number of mobile phones to exceed world population by 2014 By Joshua Pramis - February 28, 2013
Nielson’s – A look Across Media: The
Cross-Platform Report December 2013
Barbara van Schewick Ex Parte Letter at 2 &
Attach. A at 13, fig. 2 (discussing evidence of blocking and discrimination as
noted by several sources, including the Body of European Regulators for
Electronic Communications (BEREC), that shows the relative frequency of
broadband providers reporting some level of restriction). The European
Parliament voted to adopt net neutrality rules in April 2014 that will now be
considered by the 28 European Union Member States in order to become binding
regulation. To date, among European countries only the Netherlands and Slovenia
have net neutrality regulations. See Zack Whittaker, EU Passes Net Neutrality
Law, Votes to End Throttling, Site Blocking, Between the Lines Blog, ZD Net
(Apr. 3, 2014), http://www.zdnet.com/eu-net-neutrality-passes-vote-7000027998/.
Body of European Regulators for Electronic
Communications, A View of Traffic Management and Other Practices Resulting in
Restrictions to the Open Internet in Europe 8-9 (2012), available at
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7521087926 (discussing several
instances where operators gave preferential treatment to select over-the-top
traffic). Additionally, there is evidence that the second largest French ISP
was automatically blocking ads in Internet traffic delivered to subscribers in
January 2013. While the ISP ultimately removed the block following government
intervention, press reports indicate that the block was motivated to pressure
Google into compensating the ISP for the traffic generated by YouTube. Barbara
van Schewick Ex Parte Letter s at 3; Cyrus Farivar, France’s Second Largest ISP
Suspends Ad Blocking For Now (Jan. 7, 2013), ArsTechnica,
http://arstechnica.com/business/2013/01/frances-second-largest-isp-suspends-ad-blocking-for-now/.
Furthermore, the Voice on the Net (VON) Coalition Europe released a report
identifying restrictions on Internet access by mobile networks based mainly on
the operators’ terms and conditions. The report noted that in 2012, a
U.K.-based mobile Internet access service provider contractually limited users
from using services not affiliated with the ISP, including Internet-based
streaming services, voice, peer-to-peer file sharing, or Internet-based video.
VON Europe, Non-exhaustive Identification of Restrictions on Internet Access by
Mobile Operators 17 (2012),
http://www.scribd.com/doc/98641591/VON-Europe-Non-exhaustive-Indentification-of-Restrictions-on-Internet-
Access-by-Mobile-Operators.
Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996,
Pub. L. No. 104-104, § 706, 110 Stat. 56, 153 (1996) (1996 Act), as amended in
relevant part by the Broadband Data Improvement Act (BDIA), Pub. L. No.
110-385, 122 Stat. 4096 (2008), is now codified in Title 47, Chapter 12 of the
United States Code. See 47 U.S.C. § 1301 et seq.
