And a pony for you…

I need to expain why this is bad in some detail, but for now enjoy Julian Sanchez’ Internet for Everyone campaign aims to bridge digital divide: Legal scholars Jonathan Zittrain and Tim Wu stressed what Zittrain called the “weird” economics of providing high-speed Internet. Initially, said Zittrain, cost increases are commensurate with the scale of … Continue reading “And a pony for you…”

I need to expain why this is bad in some detail, but for now enjoy Julian Sanchez’ Internet for Everyone campaign aims to bridge digital divide:

Legal scholars Jonathan Zittrain and Tim Wu stressed what Zittrain called the “weird” economics of providing high-speed Internet. Initially, said Zittrain, cost increases are commensurate with the scale of the network, until “suddenly it’s free, because you’re peering.” But in practice, said Wu, drawing an analogy to the energy crisis, broadband in the U.S. is “controlled by a tiny cartel.” Nevertheless, Vint Cerf—who in addition to being known as the “father of the Internet” authored the manifesto “The Internet Is for Everyone”—stressed that the new rules for broadband should not resemble “the vertical regulation of the past.”

All this may have a whiff of “and a pony” about it: Nobody is going to oppose universal, cheap, fast Internet access—but how long will this motley crew speak with a unified voice when it comes to the nitty-gritty of policymaking? I put the question to Zittrain after the press conference, and he allowed that consensus is less likely the further one gets from these pleasing generalities. The coalition’s role, he suggested, will primarily consist of focusing public attention on the issue—and on instances of telecom rent-seeking that might otherwise slide under the radar.

Everybody likes free stuff, until the strings become evident.

Technorati Tags:

Seoul Declaration

The Seoul Declaration For the Future of the Internet Economy signed by OECD ministers isn’t half bad. There’s no wacky net neutrality language in it, and plenty of commitment to protect privacy and intellectual property. This must have taken a lot of work, as the forces of evil were in full tilt to corrupt this … Continue reading “Seoul Declaration”

The Seoul Declaration For the Future of the Internet Economy signed by OECD ministers isn’t half bad. There’s no wacky net neutrality language in it, and plenty of commitment to protect privacy and intellectual property. This must have taken a lot of work, as the forces of evil were in full tilt to corrupt this document. But it’s OK.

Technorati Tags:

Vuze Shows True Colors

Vuze is the Palo Alto peer-to-peer indexer that helped bring the net neutrality circus to the FCC with their publicity stunt of a complaint against Comcast. They’ve maintained their business was nothing to do with piracy, and all about innovative delivery of legal content. It turns out it’s mainly piracy after all: This month, Vuze … Continue reading “Vuze Shows True Colors”

Vuze is the Palo Alto peer-to-peer indexer that helped bring the net neutrality circus to the FCC with their publicity stunt of a complaint against Comcast. They’ve maintained their business was nothing to do with piracy, and all about innovative delivery of legal content. It turns out it’s mainly piracy after all:

This month, Vuze did an about-face. Unleashing the software’s search engine, it enabled users to find and retrieve content indexed by some of the world’s most popular BitTorrent search engines. These include Mininova, an index site in the Netherlands now under legal assault from Dutch anti-piracy authorities. As a result, users don’t have to fire up a second file-sharing program to find free, pirated versions of the titles Vuze offers on a pay-per-view basis. They can do it through Vuze’s search engine.

Mininova is all about piracy, and if Vuze is searching it, so are they. It can’t be long until Hollywood and the studios terminate their agreements with Vuze and relegate them to their ultimate destiny as the Google of piracy. Except they’ll have lots of fun competition. For one, the reigning Google of piracy is actually Google.

Technorati Tags:

Battling Carriers

Do we have meaningful competition among broadband carriers? See the Verizon PolicyBlog comments for an example of what the competition looks like. Here are Verizon VP Tom Taulke’s comments on retention marketing: First, should consumers have information from all providers before choosing a carrier for voice or video services . . . or a package … Continue reading “Battling Carriers”

Do we have meaningful competition among broadband carriers? See the Verizon PolicyBlog comments for an example of what the competition looks like. Here are Verizon VP Tom Taulke’s comments on retention marketing:

First, should consumers have information from all providers before choosing a carrier for voice or video services . . . or a package of services? Of course. That seems like a no-brainer. Information – the much-touted concept of transparency – is both the consumer’s and competition’s best friend. How can consumers know if they’re getting the best deal if one of the service providers can’t give them information before they’ve made the purchase?

Second, should competitors in the wireline communications marketplace operate by the same rules? Again, a no-brainer. Policymakers love to talk about “competition” and the proverbial “level playing field.” Today, cable is fully engaged in “win-back” marketing directed toward any customer who decides to switch to Verizon’s FIOS video. Yet, this complaint is designed to prohibit Verizon from marketing – or even providing information — to a customer who decides to switch from Verizon to cable-provided voice service.

Kyle McSlarrow of the cable industry comments.

Here is what is really going on. For the first time in history, Verizon’s entrenched incumbent position in the phone marketplace is being challenged successfully by cable competitors providing digital phone service, a relatively new marketplace development that gives consumers more choice, better value, and — according to J.D. Power and Associates — provides consumers greater satisfaction in every region of the United States. Not to put too fine a point on it: Verizon is losing customers.

Naturally, you’ll do everything you can to retain them. I get that. But, the law is very clear: Verizon can market to its heart’s content 362 days of the year to its customers. However, when customers make a decision to leave you, you are obligated to honor their decision to request that their phone number be transferred to their new provider, and respect their privacy by porting their current number within 4 days without harassing them with marketing retention calls. Congress, on a bipartisan basis, and the FCC have previously recognized that integrity in the number porting process is essential for true competition to flourish.

Technorati Tags:

Supernova 2008 Wrap-up

Supernova was an interesting experience. It’s not my usual crowd, more a Web 2.0/Social Networking scene than my hard-core networking and tech policy people, but there was a fair bit of overlap. I met some people whose blog work I’ve read for years – Steve Gillmor, J. D. Lasica, Kevin Marks, Susan Crawford, and Kevin … Continue reading “Supernova 2008 Wrap-up”

Supernova was an interesting experience. It’s not my usual crowd, more a Web 2.0/Social Networking scene than my hard-core networking and tech policy people, but there was a fair bit of overlap. I met some people whose blog work I’ve read for years – Steve Gillmor, J. D. Lasica, Kevin Marks, Susan Crawford, and Kevin Werbach, the organizer. Some other people I’ve discussed and debated things with over the years, such as Joi Ito, were also there, but I didn’t have a chance to talk to them in the general rush of events and what-not, and Doc Searls was unfortunately too ill to attend. Doc and I have been missing each other at conferences for years now, so the tradition may as well continue.

While most of the discussion was about monetizing social networks, there were excursions into network policy and technology at several junctures, and Kevin committed to making these themes larger in next year’s show. The hard-core telecom guys were in Vegas for NXTComm, but they wouldn’t have contributed all that much anyway.

Regarding “monetizing,” it strikes me as odd to build a social networking site, get a million members, and only then start to think about making money from it. You’d think that any smart business would begin with a “revenue model” and then design a service around it, but this is a different world. There are only about four ways to make money from the Internet anyway:

1. Sell subscriptions
2. Sell ads
3. Sell stuff
4. Facilitate some sort of financial transaction and take a cut.

If I were in that business, I’d market exclusivity because there are just too many hooligans and ruffians on the Internet. Toss Metcalfe’s Law out the window and adopt Bennett’s Law, that the value of a network is the mean of the value of the individual members. If I want to mix with street people, I’ll go downtown. But that’s just weird thinking.

Several of the speakers declared Google the new Evil Empire, which is quite realistic and on-point, and the tussle between the search and ads monopoly and poor little Facebook featured prominently in one panel.

I explained that the Internet as we know it today – IPv4 with TCP and UDP – isn’t actually the be-all and end-all of innovation nurture. It permits experimentation among applications with limited requirements for bandwidth and delay, and a whole new set of applications will show up as soon as we have a network that can deliver more data with less delay.

Conveying that one point to an audience of eager innovators was worth the hassle of getting up at 6:30 in the morning, although it didn’t seem so until I caught up on my sleep.

Kevin is a great host, and the conference was well-organized and smooth. I hope to do it next year, when (real) networking is a bigger theme.
Technorati Tags:

IT Examiner coverage of Innovation ’08

John Oram of IT Examiner does a fair write-up on the Innovation ’08 panel in IT Examiner: Richard Bennett said he is opposed to Net Neutrality regulations because they shut down engineering options that are going to be needed for the Internet to become the one, true, general-purpose network. Today on his blog, Richard adds … Continue reading “IT Examiner coverage of Innovation ’08”

John Oram of IT Examiner does a fair write-up on the Innovation ’08 panel in IT Examiner:

Richard Bennett said he is opposed to Net Neutrality regulations because they shut down engineering options that are going to be needed for the Internet to become the one, true, general-purpose network. Today on his blog, Richard adds “Google has invested hundreds of millions of dollars in server farms to put its content, chiefly YouTube, in an Internet fast lane, and it fought for the first incarnation in order to protect its high-priority access to your ISP.”

Richard continued: “Now that we’re in a second phase that’s all about empowering P2P, Google has been much less vocal, because it can only lose in this fight. Good P2P takes Google out of the video game, as there’s no way for them to insert advertising into P2P streams. So this is why they want P2P to suck. The new tools will simply try to convince consumers to stick with Google and leave that raunchy old P2P to the pirates.”

It’s much more balanced and diligent coverage than the article in The Register.

Sweetness and Light

Cade Metz reminds us that Google is the most virtuous collection of people on Earth in this love-letter in The Register “This side of the argument said: We were pretty well known on the internet. We were pretty popular. We had some funds available. We could essentially buy prioritization that would ensure we would be … Continue reading “Sweetness and Light”

Cade Metz reminds us that Google is the most virtuous collection of people on Earth in this love-letter in The Register

“This side of the argument said: We were pretty well known on the internet. We were pretty popular. We had some funds available. We could essentially buy prioritization that would ensure we would be the search engine used by everybody. We would come out fine – a non-neutral world would be a good world for us.”

But then that Google idealism kicked in.

Continue reading “Sweetness and Light”

Introductory Remarks, Innovation ’08

Here are my opening remarks from Media Access Project’s Innovation ’08 in Santa Clara this morning. A DVD will be available shortly. This was a lively discussion, with Google and Vuze on the case. The remarks are cross-posted to CircleID and were Slash-dotted. One Slashdot reader said: Thank you, I finally read a post from … Continue reading “Introductory Remarks, Innovation ’08”

Here are my opening remarks from Media Access Project’s Innovation ’08 in Santa Clara this morning. A DVD will be available shortly. This was a lively discussion, with Google and Vuze on the case.

The remarks are cross-posted to CircleID and were Slash-dotted. One Slashdot reader said: Thank you, I finally read a post from someone who gets it. I didn’t think that would ever happen. That’s not a bad response.

Good morning and welcome. My name is Richard Bennett and I’m a network engineer. I’ve built networking products for 30 years and contributed to a dozen networking standards, including Ethernet and Wi-Fi. I was one of the witnesses at the FCC hearing at Harvard, and I wrote one of the dueling Op-Ed’s on net neutrality that ran in the Mercury News the day of the Stanford hearing.

I’m opposed to net neutrality regulations because they foreclose some engineering options that we’re going to need for the Internet to become the one true general-purpose network that links all of us to each other, connects all our devices to all our information, and makes the world a better place. Let me explain.
Continue reading “Introductory Remarks, Innovation ’08”

Mark Cuban Does it Again

Why Tiered Broadband is a Wonderful Thing and ASIVS – Blog Maverick There is a new and exciting development. Its called an Application Specific Integrated Video Service (ASIVS) . What is an ASIVS ? Its a computer dedicated specifically to downloading and playing both standard definition and high definition video. You connect it to a … Continue reading “Mark Cuban Does it Again”

Why Tiered Broadband is a Wonderful Thing and ASIVS – Blog Maverick

There is a new and exciting development. Its called an Application Specific Integrated Video Service (ASIVS) . What is an ASIVS ? Its a computer dedicated specifically to downloading and playing both standard definition and high definition video. You connect it to a network that is dedicated to delivering GIGABITS PER SECOND of high quality video with ZERO buffering. Its amazing, it always works and connects right to your standard def or High Definition TV, easily. Most of the systems I have seen have a pretty good programming guide and scheduling system and they will let you download AS MUCH VIDEO AS YOU WANT, limited only by the size of its hard drive!!

If you haven’t heard of the ASIVS, its because most people call it a DVR.

If downloading TV shows is so important to you, add a DVR to your cable or satellite service for 5 bucks a month and download all you want. If you want to watch those shows on your laptop, connect the composite video out in your DVR to the composite in on your laptop. Same with movies.

Read the whole thing, it’s a classic.

Technorati Tags:

Innovation ’08 Details

Here’s an update on the MAP/AT&T tech policy event next week: Where: de Saisset Museum at Santa Clara University 500 El Camino Real, Santa Clara, CA 95053 When: Thursday, June 12 10:15 AM Panel 1: What Does Net Neutrality Mean Now? Comcast’s interruption of P2P transmissions has generated debate about the need and wisdom of … Continue reading “Innovation ’08 Details”

Here’s an update on the MAP/AT&T tech policy event next week:

Where: de Saisset Museum at Santa Clara University
500 El Camino Real, Santa Clara, CA 95053

When: Thursday, June 12

10:15 AM Panel 1: What Does Net Neutrality Mean Now?
Comcast’s interruption of P2P transmissions has generated debate about the need and wisdom of deploying advanced net management technologies. Can and will the private sector address this problem without government mandates? Historically, the debate about Net Neutrality has focused on who can access information distribution channels, and under what circumstances. Comcast’s recent interruption brings up new questions, explored here by some of the leading experts in the field.

Panelists:
George Ou, Technology for Mortals
Richard Bennett, Network Architect, Broadband Politics
Ronald B. Yokubaitis, Chairman and CEO, Data Foundry
Richard Whitt, Senior Policy Counsel, Google
Jay Monahan, General Counsel, Vuze, Inc.
Parul Desai (Moderator)

They had me down as “Musician” which is pretty funny for anyone who ever heard me sing “Take Me Out to the Ballgame.”

Another panel will discuss the 700 MHz auction after lunch:

12:30 PM Panel 2: Spectrum Policy After the 700 MHz Auction
The FCC’s recently concluded 700 MHz auction has been praised, criticized, and puzzled over. Auction veterans will discuss what happened, why it happened, and what will happen next.

Panelists:
Coleman Bazelon, Principal, The Brattle Group
Gregory Rose, Economist, Gregory Rose & Associates
Carolyn Brandon, CTIA
Marc Berejka, Senior Director of Public Policy, Microsoft Corporation
Joanne Hovis, President, Columbia Telecommunications Corp.
Harold Feld (Moderator)