Slashdot Mirror


FCC Goes Halfway On Opening 700 MHz Spectrum

The FCC has set rules for the upcoming auction of 700-MHz spectrum and they went halfway on the four open access principles that Google and others had called for. The agency said yes to "open devices" and "open applications," thus requiring the auction winner to permit consumers to use any device or application on the network. But the FCC turned down "open services" and "open networks," so the winners will not be obligated to let others buy access at wholesale prices in order to offer network services. This vote would seem to mean that Google won't bid in the spectrum auction. Ars has a more in-depth look at the outcome.

12 of 192 comments (clear)

  1. Wouldn't that be more reason to win? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Shouldn't google bid so that they can enforce the openness they want, rather than letting someone else win and keep it closed?

    1. Re:Wouldn't that be more reason to win? by jamieswith · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This has some merit, but I can think of one reason why the lack of these makes Google nervous of getting into a bidding war...

      Because not including these two levels of 'open-ness' means a higher potential value to whoever is the winner... because there's a greater degree of possible profit... you get to pick your competitors and set your prices

      It simply wouldnt be in the interests of the huge telecoms giants to bid too high if they then had to turn around and sell access for next to nothing to anyone (including google) who wanted to use it... but if they're getting total control over who provides service and at what cost... then its worth a lot more money.

      If they can charge what they want for access, suddenly you can justify bidding a lot higher

  2. Halfway is no good by realmolo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    See, "open devices" and "open applications" probably means that you are free to use any device or application that has been approved by whoever wins the auction in question. I fully expect AT&T (or whoever wins, but they look like they will) to announce some kind of ridiculously elaborate and expensive "open licensing program" where if you want to make a device or applications that works with their network, you'll have to pay them gobs of money. They'll say it's for "adminstrative fees" or "Homeland Security Wireless Management and Auditing Charges" or some such crap.

    Personally, while I like what Google is trying to do, I think they should stay in the bidding anyway. I'd much rather have Google own the spectrum than literally ANY other telco corporation. Google isn't nearly as evil as those guys are.

  3. Re:Google May Bid Yet by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It would be a good PR for Google to bid 4.6B for it, knowing fully well it will be out bidded by AT&T and Verizon.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  4. Re:Google May Bid Yet by realmolo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The whole problem is, Google really has no chance of winning.

    They don't have the political connections or the ENORMOUS resources that AT&T/Cingular has. Never mind that AT&T/Cingular REALLY REALLY wants this spectrum. I mean, it's their wet dream to own that spectrum. It's the future of the company. They essentially will pay whatever they have to for it. But it would be amusing to see Google keep upping the bid on them.

  5. Re:Is there a purpose for the FCC anymore? by Applekid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    To impose moral values on the public at large through the banning 7 dirty words and other nanny-says-no naughtiness.

    --
    More Twoson than Cupertino
  6. Re:Abolish the FCC! by stinerman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I wouldn't abolish the FCC, but I would considerably reduce their scope. The FCC is what keeps broadcasters on the proper frequency and the like. I'd let them regulate power, frequency, etc., but remove their ability to censor people. They'd also have no say in anything not owned by the public at large.

  7. Re:Google by rootofevil · · Score: 4, Insightful

    given who they have been trying to push, and for what they have been trying to push for, i applaud their efforts.

    its about damn time someone at least pretended to stick up for the little guy.

    --
    turn up the jukebox and tell me a lie
  8. Re:Google May Bid Yet by kebes · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Exactly. Google is upping the bid, because they know that they will be out-bid by the entrenched telcos that can't afford to lose that spectrum. If they call Google's bluff, Google will happily buy the spectrum for a few billion and make a killing. But, since the entrenched telcos will certainly continue out-bidding until they win, it's in Google's best interests to at least put some pressure on them to make the eventual spectrum a bit more open--that way Google can capitalize on that spectrum in some way. (A nice by-product is that this is way better for consumers.)

    I'm not so naive as to think that Google is doing this for purely philanthropic reasons... however it's really nice to see a powerful company putting pressure on entrenched monopolies, with an end result that the people get high-quality, more fair access to a public resource.

  9. Re:Google May Bid Yet by gad_zuki! · · Score: 4, Insightful

    >But it would be amusing to see Google keep upping the bid on them.

    Yes, and as a cell phone customer it will be extra amusing paying for this bidding war via raised rates.

  10. Re:Google by ajs · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Google not bidding means they never really intended to win, they were just using this as publicity to try an force the stipulations they wanted without having to be the high bidder.

    Google sure has been trying to throw their weight around a lot lately. Why don't you wait and see what happens before making judgments about a company based on what you think they'll probably do....

  11. Re:Abolish the FCC! by Suzuran · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Without the FCC, I can also set up a large broadcasting station that transmits many signals throughout the FM broadcast band, strategically placed over the top of any existing stations, for the purpose of promoting Scientology. All it takes is one person with a few hundred dollars to talk over the top of any station they want for a few block radius. One guy with a few hundred dollars doing this trick in the HF spectrum can ruin use of a frequency for an entire continent. Don't like it if the guy down the street decides to put a hardcore gangsta rap station over the top of your low-power talk station? TOUGH.