[opendtv] Re: ==3Futf-8=3FQ=3FFCC=5Fadmits=5Fmobile=5Fcan=E2=80=99t=5Freplace=5Fhome=5FInternet,=3F==3Futf-8=3FQ=3F=5Fwon=E2=80=99t=5Flower=5Fspeed=5Fstandard=3FMessage-Id: <988FEEAF-DC65-4095-89A2-9389113DDECC@xxxxxxxxxx>

From: Craig Birkmaier <brewmastercraig@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 06:28:14 -0500

Reading this report, one thing is obvious. Jon Brodkin is going to attack the
Pai FCC, no matter what it does. This report is terribly biased, and Brodkin is
clueless about broadband deployment.

These paragraph illustrate that bias:

"The draft report indicates that the pace of both fixed and mobile broadband
deployment declined dramatically in the two years following the prior
Commission's Title II [net neutrality] Order," Pai said.

That claim is at odds with how ISPs portray their own progress. The cable
industry's top lobbying group recently boasted about dramatic increases in
home Internet speeds that occurred while net neutrality rules were in place.
The mobile industry lobby says the same.

Sorry Jon, but this was to be expected; but even more important, it did nothing
to extend broadband deployment .

Cable systems have been upgrading their broadband performance for more than a
decade as the Docsis modem standards have evolved. The reality is that cable
broadband met the 25/3 requirement when the Title II order was approved by the
Wheeler FCC.

LIkewise, the cellular industry has been upgrading broadband performance
continuously as it seeks to make wireless broadband competitive with cable, and
demand for cable data services has exploded. It is also worth noting, as the
fact sheet stated, that telco data services were held to a different standard
that cable under the Title II order.

If all we need as a country is a regulated duopoly for broadband, it could be
argued that the Title II order did a good job of entrenching these services.
This is the historic model of heavy handed FCC regulation of monopolies and
duopolies , brought back from the trash heap of history.

The whole point of revoking the Title II decision was to undo the regulatory
burdens placed upon NEW ENTRANTS with limited resources and experience in
navigating the mine fields of State and Federal regulation. Any time the
government forces business to spend millions on lawyers and lobbyists to play
the regulatory game several things happen:

1. Revenues that could be used for deployment are consumed complying with the
demands of the regulators;

2. Capital costs may increase based on the increased costs and risks associated
with compliance.

3. Historically, innovation has suffered as regulators get involved in
technology decisions and dealt approvals for deployment.

In short, if you want more competition and innovation, you DO NOT erect
barriers to their entry into the market.

Regards
Craig

On Jan 22, 2018, at 12:50 AM, Monty Solomon <monty@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/01/fcc-admits-mobile-cant-replace-home-internet-wont-lower-speed-standard/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:

- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org

- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.

[opendtv] Re: ==3Futf-8=3FQ=3FFCC=5Fadmits=5Fmobile=5Fcan=E2=80=99t=5Freplace=5Fhome=5FInternet,=3F==3Futf-8=3FQ=3F=5Fwon=E2=80=99t=5Flower=5Fspeed=5Fstandard=3FMessage-Id: <988FEEAF-DC65-4095-89A2-9389113DDECC@xxxxxxxxxx>

Other related posts: