| |
|
The most interesting latest news on the topic: Regulation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phones come in handy in a crisis as long as they work, an obstacle Japan is striving to develop with networks that function even in extreme conditions.
Japan built its burgeoning "disaster-proof" mobile network to withstand natural disasters by quickly diverting traffic from compromised stations and preventing network overload. The country's interest in improving its networks stems from the 2011 tsunami, which knocked communication in some areas when people desperately needed it. Telecom companies NTT Docomo and KDDI are spearheading separate projects, but the Japanese government is pushing the companies to cooperate to get the networks up and running as soon as possible. In disasters, mobile service is often more reliable than landlines, and more accessible to people caught away from home during an emergency. During the Japanese tsunami, as well as the tornadoes in the U.S. last summer and a bevy of other crisis incidents, people relied on cell service and social media to communicate with family, friends and rescue teams. Creating a sturdy emergency network will benefit Japan, which as an island is prone to natural disasters such as tsunamis and earthquakes, and may inspire other nations to concentrate on shoring up their resources to make emergency communication more reliable. A disaster-proof system in the U.S., however, could be more difficult to create. The fiercely competitive relationships between carriers in the U.S. could hinder similar projects and the government is less likely to demand network-building cooperation. Also, the spectrum squeeze makes it difficult for U.S. carriers to devote bandwidth to establishing comprehensive re-routing systems. For example, LightSquared's proposed merger with Sprint would have given Sprint access to more satellite-based network resources, but U.S. regulators blocked the deal due to potential interferences with GPS systems. The FAA warned the GPS disturbance might actually decrease safety by interfering with aviation signals, even though LightSquared insisted it could fix the interference issues and still run its towers. At the same time, unless the government places primacy on letting carriers use such satellites to bolster their networks, the U.S. will have trouble carrying out a project along the same lines as Japan and keeping citizens in contact during emergencies. AT&T introduced a series of "Remote Mobility Zone" kits, which can connect cell service with satellites in case of emergency, but these cost upwards of $15,000, making them too expensive for most consumers. This is not good for the U.S. Although the country is less vulnerable to tsunamis than Japan and other Asian countries, the nation still experiences devastating hurricanes, tornadoes and earthquakes, and it needs a foolproof communication system for people just as much as Japan. Researchers in the U.S. developed a mobile app that uses Bluetooth short-range radio technology to reroute data during service interruptions, but something like that would not be as widespread as a carrier-backed emergency system. The U.S. is developing emergency mobile services, such as a disaster response text alert system. But if the infrastructure to transmit these messages is damaged, systems like these are useless. Given the climate in Congress and among carriers in the U.S., it is unlikely AT&T, Verizon and other major carriers will work together on a project along the same scale as Japan's. But, if a wide-scale natural disaster strikes and people are left without service, both regulators and carriers will face angry citizens wondering why they did not harness the technology available while other countries were doing so. |
|
|
|
|
Phones come in handy in a crisis, as long as they work, an obstacle Japan is striving to develop with networks that work in the most extreme of conditions.
Japan built its burgeoning "disaster-proof" mobile network to withstand natural disasters by quickly diverting traffic from compromised stations and preventing network overload. The country, whose interest in improving its networks, stems from the 2011 tsunami, which knocked out communication when people desperately needed it. As a result, Telecom companies NTT Docomo and KDDI are spearheading projects, but separately, so the Japanese government is pushing them to cooperate and get the networks up and running as soon as possible. In disasters, mobile service is often more reliable than landlines, and more accessible to people caught away from home during an emergency. During the Japanese tsunami, as well as the tornadoes in the U.S. last summer and a bevy of other crisis incidents, people relied on cell service and social media to communicate with family, friends and rescue teams. Japan, an island is prone to natural disasters such as tsunamis and earthquakes, will benefit from the sturdier emergency network, and its actions may inspire other nations to concentrate on making emergency communication more reliable. A disaster-proof system in the U.S., however, is more difficult to create. The fiercely-competitive relationships between carriers in the U.S. hinders similar projects and the government is less likely to demand network-building cooperation. In addition, the spectrum squeeze makes it difficult for U.S. carriers to devote bandwidth to establishing comprehensive re-routing systems. For example, LightSquared's proposed merger with Sprint would have given Sprint access to more satellite-based network resources, but U.S. regulators blocked the deal due to potential interferences with GPS systems. Meanwhile, the FAA warned that GPS disturbance may actually decrease safety, by interfering with aviation signals, even though LightSquared insisted it could fix the interference issues and still run its towers. At the same time, unless the government places primacy on letting carriers use such satellites to bolster their networks, the U.S. will have trouble carrying out a project along the same lines as Japan and keeping citizens in contact during emergencies. AT&T introduced a series of "Remote Mobility Zone" kits, which connects cell service with satellites in case of emergency, but these cost upwards of $15,000, making them too expensive for most consumers. The U.S., which experiences devastating hurricanes, tornadoes and earthquakes, needs a foolproof communication system for people just as much as Japan. Researchers in the U.S. developed a mobile app that uses Bluetooth short-range radio technology to reroute data during service interruptions, but that method wouldn't be as widespread as a carrier-backed emergency system. The U.S. is developing emergency mobile services, such as a disaster response text alert system, but if the infrastructure to transmit these messages is damaged, systems like these are useless. Given the climate in Congress and among carriers in the U.S., AT&T, Verizon and other major carriers are unlikely to work together on a project on same scale as in Japan. But, if a widescale natural disaster strikes, and people are left without service, similar to Hurricane Katrina, regulators and carriers will face criticism as to why they didn't harness the technologies available in other countries, such as Japan. |
|
|
|
|
Nearly 30 million Americans, or one in six mobile users, experienced "bill shock," a sudden and unexpected jump in monthly cellular bills, and the Federal Communications Commission is battling to combat the problem. |
|
|
|
|
Think your cell phone bill is too high? Watch out -- Verizon is putting together a plan to win regulator approval to buy spectrum from cable companies, potentially undermining competition and making things worse for wireless customers. |
|
|
|
|
Comcast and Verizon are defending their spectrum sale to government officials today, while competitors object on grounds of a fair market. In a hearing before the Senate's antitrust committee, Comcast will defend the $3.6 billion spectrum sale to Verizon, a deal being examined by the Justice Department and the Federal Communications Commission. The hearing, "The Verizon/Cable Deals: Harmless Collaboration or a Threat to Competition and Consumers?" will look at what the deal could mean for free market conditions in the wireless market. Verizon is attempting to acquire more spectrum to boost its developing 4G LTE network, which it expects will cover nearly the entire nation by next year. The purchase includes a band of spectrum relatively unused by Comcast and other cable companies, and its acquisition could help guarantee Verizon's success in the 4G market, especially as data-hungry devices like the new iPad and upcoming iPhone 5 will rely on the network. The deal also includes a controversial marketing component that lets cable companies and Verizon =promote each other's services, but the parties maintain it won't decrease competition. As technology changes, different industries come together to make the best use of resources -- in this case, cable providers and mobile carriers. If the FCC and lawmakers approve the deal, the companies will get a huge boost as they try to find the best way to use and acquire resources. But regulators could consider the spectrum acquisition a threat to fair competition, which leaves mobile companies fewer options to expand networks. It also potentially sets a precedent on the types of mergers regulators will allow at a time when communications companies are trying to decide where to place their bets for the future. For Comcast, the nation's largest cable provider, selling the spectrum is a way to compete with mobile device manufacturers, who are edging to the top of the most powerful companies in the telecommunications industry. And, Comcast notes, the arrangement does not involve consolidation of customers, jobs, assets or operating businesses, as proposed in the rejected AT&T and T-Mobile merger. "By enhancing the Cable Companies' and Verizon Wireless's own products and services, the Joint Venture will compete with similar solutions that AT&T, Dish Network, Google, Apple, Microsoft, and others already have introduced into the marketplace," says Comcast senior vice president David Cohen in hearing documents submitted before the Senate testimony. "This, in turn, will spur other companies to respond, perpetuating a cycle of competitive investment and innovation." Other industry players vocally oppose the deal. The industry union group Communications Workers of America and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers say the partnership would form an "unchecked monopoly by the nation's largest cable and wireless companies." Fourth-place carrier T-Mobile cautions the deal could result in higher prices and less competition, a charge that led to the demise of AT&T's acquisition of T-Mobile. Comcast will defend its best interests to Washington officials in the Senate hearing, attempting to show regulators the needs of the industry rely on agreements over shared resources. Since regulators are wary of creating monopoly-like circumstances when powerful providers combine, the companies will maintain this agreement brings a unique set of conditions from the main parties. If regulators decide the deal is acceptable as a means for companies to keep up with spectrum demands, it could unfurl a wave of wireless consolidation, or further agency-monitored business strategies that will inevitably affect consumer pricing and choices. |
|
|
|
|
Comcast and Verizon are defending their spectrum sale to government officials today, while competitors object on grounds of a fair market. In a hearing before the Senate's antitrust committee, Comcast will defend the $3.6 billion spectrum sale to Verizon, a deal being examined by the Justice Department and the Federal Communications Commission. The hearing, "The Verizon/Cable Deals: Harmless Collaboration or a Threat to Competition and Consumers?" will look at what the deal could mean for free market conditions in the wireless market. Verizon is attempting to acquire more spectrum to boost its developing 4G LTE network, which it expects will cover nearly the entire nation by next year. The purchase includes a band of spectrum relatively unused by Comcast and other cable companies, and its acquisition could help guarantee Verizon's success in the 4G market, especially as data-hungry devices like the new iPad and upcoming iPhone 5 will rely on the network. The deal also includes a controversial marketing component that lets cable companies and Verizon =promote each other's services, but the parties maintain it won't decrease competition. As technology changes, different industries come together to make the best use of resources -- in this case, cable providers and mobile carriers. If the FCC and lawmakers approve the deal, the companies will get a huge boost as they try to find the best way to use and acquire resources. But regulators could consider the spectrum acquisition a threat to fair competition, which leaves mobile companies fewer options to expand networks. It also potentially sets a precedent on the types of mergers regulators will allow at a time when communications companies are trying to decide where to place their bets for the future. For Comcast, the nation's largest cable provider, selling the spectrum is a way to compete with mobile device manufacturers, who are edging to the top of the most powerful companies in the telecommunications industry. And, Comcast notes, the arrangement does not involve consolidation of customers, jobs, assets or operating businesses, as proposed in the rejected AT&T and T-Mobile merger. "By enhancing the Cable Companies' and Verizon Wireless's own products and services, the Joint Venture will compete with similar solutions that AT&T, Dish Network, Google, Apple, Microsoft, and others already have introduced into the marketplace," says Comcast senior vice president David Cohen in hearing documents submitted before the Senate testimony. "This, in turn, will spur other companies to respond, perpetuating a cycle of competitive investment and innovation." Other industry players vocally oppose the deal. The industry union group Communications Workers of America and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers say the partnership would form an "unchecked monopoly by the nation's largest cable and wireless companies." Fourth-place carrier T-Mobile cautions the deal could result in higher prices and less competition, a charge that led to the demise of AT&T's acquisition of T-Mobile. Comcast will defend its best interests to Washington officials in the Senate hearing, attempting to show regulators the needs of the industry rely on agreements over shared resources. Since regulators are wary of creating monopoly-like circumstances when powerful providers combine, the companies will maintain this agreement brings a unique set of conditions from the main parties. If regulators decide the deal is acceptable as a means for companies to keep up with spectrum demands, it could unfurl a wave of wireless consolidation, or further agency-monitored business strategies that will inevitably affect consumer pricing and choices. |
|
|
|
|
Certain prescription drugs may soon be available to consumers through digital kiosks, rather than a doctor's diagnosis, underscoring the methods technology is transforming healthcare. The Food and Drug Administration is mulling digitally-driven patient kiosks where people can self-diagnose for specific conditions through an algorithm-based survey. The process would drop the prescription requirement for certain treatments and common ailments. Self-diagnosis would let users get medical care in a more convenient way. The kiosk concept under FDA consideration indicates the regulatory agency is taking a serious step towards using digital technology to deliver healthcare, moving away from relying on third-party app developers. With kiosks, the FDA is considering eliminating the need for prescriptions for conditions like asthma, diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol and migraines, and the kiosks could also be used for refills after an initial diagnosis. Part of the FDA's process includes holding two public hearings in Washington, D.C., to get feedback from the medical community and public at large. "FDA is aware that industry is developing new technologies that consumers could use to self-screen for a particular disease or condition and determine whether a particular medication is appropriate for them," says the public hearing notice in the Federal Register. "For example, kiosks or other technological aids in pharmacies or on the Internet could lead consumers through an algorithm for a particular drug product." Should a digital diagnosis kiosk find its way into neighborhood drug stores, primary care physicians will have more time to focus on patients with severe conditions and lessen their patient load, one way that digital kiosks could relieve an overburdened system. But patients who are diagnosing themselves could easily misinterpret symptoms and receive an improper medication, or end up taking a medication that conflicts with another. Without a physician to spell out the details, they could misinterpret what they're taking. But if the algorithm for self-diagnosis is clear, and pharmacists are on-hand to help walk patients through the process as the FDA suggests in its preliminary planning, the system is expected to streamline the current process and help patients avoid wait times. The idea of computer technology aiding the medical profession is slowly developing, with smartphone and tablet apps to help doctors and patients alike. Some diagnostic tools rely on a mobile touch screen through finger strokes, or even saliva. Other apps and devices work to pinpoint other conditions, from one that helps doctors diagnose stroke symptoms, to a futuristic proposed "smart pill", which would embed a chip in medication for instant diagnostic results sent to a smart phone. As the FDA hashes out its plans to eliminate the need for prescriptions, relying on modern technology is one way to streamline a process to help save medical professionals valuable resources in an overburdened system. But to make sure patient care remains a top priority, the FDA and industry professionals are sure to carefully determine how to make the process work without compromising a potentially life-changing diagnosis. |
|
|
|
|
Samsung's paying out a bundle of money after the Korean Fair Trade Commission found it guilty of not only price-fixing, but impeding an investigation. AT&T, though, is making plenty of money, marking record iPad sales over the weekend and announcing it's giving out $250 million in grants to help schools keep their students from dropping out. Meanwhile, Mike Daisey, who gained attention as the so-called top expert on Foxconn abuses in China, is now saying his translator led him astray. Korean Officials Fine Samsung For Blocking InvestigationThe Korean Fair Trade Commission has fined Samsung the equivalent of $356,000 U.S. dollars for obstructing its price-fixing investigation. The penalty is in addition to the $12.6 million the country's FTC fined Samsung for price fixing, bringing the total to nearly $13 million. According to Korea Joonang Daily, security guards met the FTC investigators when they arrived at the plant to go through Samsung's offices. In addition, employees were ordered to delete data and replace computers with important information. Also, an executive said he was away on a business trip to avoid an interview, and by the time FTC officials made their way into the Samsung offices, only one employee remained. The commission has issued a total of $40 million in fines to Korea's tech companies, accusing them of colluding to raise phone prices.
AT&T Fighting Dropout Rate with $250 Million in GrantsAT&T will spend $250 million to help reverse a U.S. student dropout crisis. Company officials said the company chose to target school drop-outs in response for calls for more corporate philanthropy. The investment is one of the largest corporate investments ever made in education, and expands on a small program the company started in 2008. Grant applicants must be able to prove they have a dropout-prevention program with a successful track record. Applications that have efforts connected to science, technology, math or engineering will rank higher for the grants, which will range from $100,000 to $300,000 each.
Discredited Daisey Points Finger at TranslatorActor Mike Daisey, who made a now-discredited name for himself by taking on Apple over its plants in China, is challenging the credibility of a little-known Chinese translator who worked with him. The woman disputes many of his claims about witnessing inhumane working conditions at iPad and iPhone plants. Daisey has recently acknowledged making up several facts about his visit, leading National Public Radio to pull a top-rated report based on his documentation. Daisey's one-man show, "The Agony and the Ecstasy of Steve Jobs," helped stir criticism of Apple and Foxcomm. However, rather than taking all the blame, he's now telling audience members he removed material he couldn't stand behind and informs the crowd that his recollections differ from his translator's.
AT&T Sets IPad Sales RecordApple wasn't the only company making money from its new iPad launch last Friday, as AT&T said it set a record for the most iPad sales and activations in one day. The Cupertino, Calif.-based company hasn't said exactly how many new iPad 2 tablets were sold last year, but some analysts estimated about one million units were sold on that device's first weekend -- meaning even more than a million new iPads may have been sold this past weekend, just after its launch. At Apple's flagship Fifth Avenue store in New York city, an estimated 13,000 new iPads were sold during the first 12 hours of its launch, for an average of about 18 per minute. The store's daily revenue, usually falling between $700,000 to $1 million, was up to $11.5 million on launch day.
Apple Hits with Suit from Chinese Authors Over PiracyA group of prominent Chinese writers want millions of dollars in compensation from Apple over allegedly selling pirated versions of their books in its iTunes store. Twelve authors have filed three separate lawsuits in a Beijing court, saying 59 of their titles were sold unlicensed through Apple's iTunes online store. The three suits together demand $3.5 million from Apple. The case is one of several legal battles for Apple in China. The company was recently targeted by Proview, a Chinese monitor and LED light maker, which says it registered the iPad trademark more than a decade ago and now seeks compensation as well from the Cupertino, Calif.-based company. |
|
|
|
|
Google could face hefty fines and major litigation as regulators in both the U.S. and Europe investigate its former tracking issues in Safari browsers. In Brief boils down complex events to give you the heart of the matter -- today and what it means for tomorrow -- clearly and simply. What's Happening: The FTC is examining whether Google's circumvention of Safari's privacy settings last year violated its settlement with the regulator, in which Google promised to not "misrepresent" its privacy policies to consumers, according to sources cited by the Wall Street Journal. In Europe, the French Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libert?s, or CNIL, will add the Safari workaround to an already existing investigation into Google's privacy-policy changes. Google recently admitted it got around Safari's privacy settings last year in order to embed its "+1" button in some ads, which then planted a cookie onto users' systems, allowing them to track online activity. The Mountain View, Calif.-based company said it inadvertently tracked Safari users, and discontinued the practice after being contacted by the Wall Street Journal over the issue. What's Really Happening: Google is already the center of a number of regulators' investigations, but momentum is beginning to build against the search giant and the consequences could be steep. The FTC, for instance, is already looking into Google's agreement with various tech companies to make its search engine the default on a number of mobile devices and recently subpoenaed Apple on the matter. Google settled last fall with the regulator and agreed to a series of privacy audits every two years, in addition to promising extra transparency around its privacy practices. The Safari error would be a major violation of that agreement. In Europe, the scrutiny against Google's treatment of privacy and user data is even more intense, and the company is already drawing heat for its recent privacy policy changes from E.U. regulators. Adding the Safari error to an already existing investigation weighs even more evidence against Google. What's Next: The investigations -- which also include state agencies in the U.S., according to the WSJ -- could saddle Google with years of legal battles as well as hefty fines for privacy violations. The FTC fine for violating its settlements is $16,000 per violation, per day. With millions of people using Safari as the most commonly used mobile browser, the fine levied against Google would be significant. However, FTC must prove that Google acted intentionally in order to obtain penalties from the company for violating the settlement. Google maintains its tracking from the Safari workaround was inadvertent and the company took action quickly when the issue came to light. The matter will likely lead to a protracted legal battle with million of dollars in fees at stake. The Takeaway: Google's great wealth and success stems from its ability to sell online ads, and using cookies to track user information and activities help it serve targeted ads that advertisers pay premium amounts for. But Google faces major competition from Facebook for these kind of ads. The Safari workaround, unintentional or not, revealed a company pushed to take major action in the face of this heated rivalry. To compete, Google is trying to push its own social-networking efforts, relying on Google+ and the +1 button to help it gather data on users in its quest for targeted advertising. In this case, its actions in trying to gather information on Safari users went too far and the consequences could take a toll on Google's future competitiveness. In light of ramped-up scrutiny, Google logically should exercise more caution, but former executives of the company warn the search giant is getting more reckless in its drive to compete for ad dollars against rivals. This week former Google executive James Whittaker stated the company was trying to push its rival social-networking service, Google+, into all aspects of its business. Whittaker stated in a public letter that Google+ became "an ominous name invoking the feeling that Google alone wasn't enough." Google still sits pretty when it comes to revenue gleaned from online ads, but the company has increasingly little room for error, especially as regulators continue to monitor it closely. |
|
|
|
|
Apple still faces scrutiny from U.S. lawmakers, pointing to continued concern over the company's privacy policies. Congress sent a letter to Apple CEO Tim Cook requesting another explanation about how Apple protects its customers' personal information on the iOS platform. The persistent demand for detailed answers highlights lawmakers' commitment to protecting consumer privacy, with the investigation focusing on a loophole allowing geo-tagged pictures, which suggests potential location tracking. "Concerns have been raised about the manner in which apps can access photographs on your mobile devices and tools provided by Apple to consumers to prevent unwanted online tracking," the Energy and Commerce Committee noted, asking Apple to present more information about how it plans to close loopholes and secure personal data. This request comes even after Apple agreed to stronger privacy policies for its apps, illustrating how stringent U.S. lawmakers have become about privacy. IPhone and Android tracking raised privacy concerns last year, stronger privacy policies were put in place curb potential data pilfering. After security researchers discovered a tracking program called Carrier IQ, Apple faced complaints along with Android and a bevy of phone makers and carriers. Apple removed the software from its phones and made strides to prevent more tracking, vetting other apps for malicious software. Apple also improved and clarified its privacy policies following a poor review from the Electronic Frontier Foundation last year, but the U.S. congressmen report the company's revisions are not clear enough. Apple agreed to set up a way for users to report apps invoking privacy questions, and to display its policies clearly for every program. The most recent inquiry by Congress into Apple's privacy policies flared up over questions on how apps like Path store user data. Though Apple and its app partners fully complied with the investigation, questions linger, as mobile technology security glitches continue to plague the industry. Apple isn't the only company facing ramped-up scrutiny by the government over data and user privacy. Lawmakers have an eye on security following Google's controversial privacy policy change, which consolidated searches among its services, raised red flags about potential security gaffes. Congress also has an eye on social media giant Facebook's privacy policies, especially as the company expands partnerships with third-party developers to ramp up profitability before its IPO. Both Google and Facebook garnered suspicions that their new policies could be used for targeted ads, though the companies deny the allegations. Apple's initial response did not satisfy lawmakers, prompting increased scrutiny and serving as a warning to other tech companies to comply fully. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tags: