FCC redefines “Broadband” and a fight is brewing.

Published on January 31, 2015 By DrJBHL In Personal Computing

First of all, ‘broadband’ is one thing and ‘baseband’ is another. As defined in the Wiki:

“broadband is wide bandwidth data transmission with an ability to simultaneously transport multiple signals and traffic types. The medium can be coaxial cable, optical fiber, twisted pair, or wireless broadband (wireless broadband includes Mobile broadband). In contrast, baseband describes a communication system in which information is transported across a single channel.” – Wikipedia

Up until 1/30/15, broadband was defined as 4Mbps/1Mbps, which is pretty laughable since Netflix recommends at least 5mbps for HD movies/streaming, and 25Mbps for 4K.

So, the FCC has redefined broadband as 25Mbps/3Mbps. As could have been predicted, the vote was 3-3 along party lines, which really reflects who’s on who’s side. “According to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, this move reflects the tremendous growth in consumer data consumption, the growing popularity of services like Netflix, and the need to create a future-proof standard that won’t be obviated in a handful of years.” (extremetech).

Wheeler based this on consumer demand for 25Mbps service with (currently) 29% opting for that tier of service (because of multi-user and multi-device/household) as well as VoIP and 4K streaming services.

Also, Wheeler is targeting rural America:

“At present, 17% of all Americans lack access to 25Mbps down 3Mbps up service, including 53% of all rural Americans. More troublingly, 20% of rural Americans lack access to even the old 4Mbps down and 1Mbps up standard. This has fallen by just 1% since 2011.” – extremetech

Even worse, there are currently 19 states where municipal broadband roadblocks which hamper rural access as well exist (see map at extremetech). See also extremetech here (an excellent article).

The pushback from telcos and cable companies is vigorous:

“The telcos and cable companies regularly assault the prospect of municipal broadband as imposing an enormous, unwarranted intrusion of the government into the private sector, painting themselves as fearless champions of the free market under siege by regulation. In reality, nothing could be further from the truth. Companies like Verizon and Comcast have received billions in tax breaks, service fund contributions, and federal grants to build out and expand existing networks. Bills like the one proposed in Missouri don’t protect small business from all-powerful government, they protect huge multinational, vertically integrated conglomerates from local competition by preventing said localities from financing a service that might meet the particular needs of their community in a cost-effective manner.” – extremetech

And that's what it's all about.

Also, Municipal broadband has proven its effectiveness for small businesses both in small towns (and in Chattanooga) across TN.

Sorry, it’s time to end the free ride for telcos and cable companies who to continue the gift card make large campaign contributions (by any other criteria, bribery) to local politicians: “A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.”

Next month, the FCC will vote on whether to preempt those state laws preventing expansion of broadband networks.

Those laws are in fact, unconstitutional as they are clearly in restraint of trade.

Sources and additional reading:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2476015,00.asp

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadband

http://www.extremetech.com/mobile/198583-fcc-raises-broadband-definition-to-25mbps-chairman-mocks-isps

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/197567-missouri-attempts-to-ban-municipal-broadband-as-white-house-pushes-to-void-the-same-restrictions

http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/01/fcc-chairman-mocks-industry-claims-that-customers-dont-need-faster-internet/

http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/07/now-you-can-tell-the-fcc-to-overturn-state-limits-on-municipal-broadband/

Comments

WOM

on Jan 31, 2015

Good Read.

starkers

on Jan 31, 2015

Now if only the same would happen here in Australia, and the Telstra/Optus monopolies were not allowed to thwart smaller telcos attempts to enter into broadband opportunities of their own, As it is, Telstra and Optus sell bandwidth to the smaller telcos, at a price, but not all smaller telcos are treated equally/fairly, and thus, neither are their customers.

We do have the National Broadband Network [NBN] which the former government implemented, with speaads up to 28mbps, but the roll out has been slowed by the present government, and some areas are expected to be waiting up to 15 years for connection, thus prolonging the stranglehold Telstra and Optus have on the industry.... and keepng prices high for sub-standard access.

DrJBHL

on Jan 31, 2015

starkers

reply 2

some areas are expected to be waiting up to 15 years for connection, thus prolonging the stranglehold Telstra and Optus have on the industry.... and keepng prices high for sub-standard access.

Exactly the same corrupt crap as here. Bet they're making "campaign contributions" in Oz as well.

psychoak

on Jan 31, 2015

It is possible to have a philosophical disagreement, but I do expect they're corrupt rather than idealistic.

I myself loath the idea of my local municipality setting up a competing broadband service, and I pay just under $70 a month for my 3/1 wi-max connection that only runs at 3/1 for a few hours a day.

They can be great when they get set up, but they tend to not grow, ever. They also tend to cost five times as much as they should have, so the local politicians can hire their friends and family and get contractors to misplace large purchases inside their homes during the project.

My ISP is from a nearby town, they spent who knows how much money to expand this wi-max out, and they're working on replacing it with a faster 4g network. Their competition set theirs up for free with stimulus funds after they did all that hard work and charges far more for a capped service that's only marginally faster. I would really like better internet, I can't begin to describe how useful a 25mbit connection would be for me. I'd rather shoot myself than pay taxes to the Hugo municipality to set it up. By the time they finished, the shit hole of a city would have straight up stolen half of the funds for as cheap a network as they could possibly manage. If it was at all reliable, it would be because they wanted to use it themselves.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!