FCC Requires Data-Roaming Agreements

itwbennett writes "The FCC has voted to require data roaming agreements between carriers in a move largely targeting AT&T and Verizon, the two largest mobile carriers in the US. 'What good is [a] smartphone if it can't be used when a subscriber is roaming across the country or even across the county?' said Commissioner Michael Copps. 'Our regulations must reflect today's reality and not make artificial distinctions between voice and data telecommunications.'"

Comments

LOLWUT?!

[Anonymous Coward]

Not sure how my Verizon CDMA phone is going to roam its data on over to AT&T's GSM network.

Re:LOLWUT?!

[Cimexus]

Yes have to admit, not sure how much difference this will make in the US market where there is already an incredlibly small choice of carriers compared to most other markets. How many of those little 'city-wide' or 'statewide' local carriers really still exist in the US? Most seem to have been swallowed up by AT&T (if GSM) or Verizon or Sprint (if CDMA).

Normally the US leans away from regulating such things and forcing businesses to make agreements with each other. So it says a lot about the lack of competition in the US cellular market that they are considering such a move. By comparison, here in Australia (which is an "OMG socialist' country by comparison to the US) doesn't force carriers to have roaming agreements (even though as a whole there is much more government regulation of industry here than in the US). But we have at least 6 or 7 major nationwide carriers here, so roaming isn't really even necessary in the first place.

I visit the US regularly (am there for several months a year) and the state of the mobile telephony and ISP industries in the US is frankly, awful. Australia is generally way more expensive in most areas of life ... but not in Internet/phone. In Australia I can pick from 30+ ISPs and a dozen cellular carriers (all GSM) at any point and most offer contract-free service. In the US most places have 1 choice of cable ISP, 1 choice of DSL ISP, and maybe 2 or 3 cellular networks (which aren't even interoperable with each other, i.e. once you pick a GSM/CDMA phone you are stuck with those carriers).

So here's hoping this opens the door for some smaller carriers in the US to increase their market share and get some competition back into the market. It's sorely needed.

Re:No artificial distinctions, BS!

[ScrewMaster]

Why do cellular providers get to make artificial distinction within the data service.

Email to you phone included in data plan. Phone mobile hotspot so your laptop can get email... EXTRA $$$

It's all just 1s and 0s, so stop dicking us with "unlimited" data plans that have limits and advertised service speeds that are far from approachable.

Well, my T-Mobile plan is pretty good. I have a 5 Gig "cap", which isn't a hard cap, it just means that I get throttled if I go over it. I don't, however, ever lose connectivity or get extra charges. I pay for HSUPA speeds, and I actually get about 7-8 mbits/sec out of it (that's using a USB tether to my laptop and running a bunch of speedtests, including broadbandreports.com.) I have a G2, and I track my usage (T-Mobile's site gives you that info as well, and they match up pretty well) and I've never gone above about 1.5 gigs in a month. That's just me ... obviously your mileage will vary. I can tether and use VoIP software without getting yelled at (or charged.) And yes, I'm thoroughly pissed off at AT&T for screwing up a good thing by buying my provider. Fuckers.