The following text is
copyright 2008 by Network World, permission is hearby given for reproduction, as
long as attribution is given and this notice is included.
Free wireless Internet with
an asterisk?
By: Scott Bradner
According to the Wall Street Journal the chair of the US
Federal Communications Commission has floated a proposal that would result in a
nation-wide free, but censored, WiFi Internet service. Chairman Martin's proposal is to try
again to auction off some of the spectrum that failed to garner the required
minimum bid during the recent auction.
The likelihood that this proposal makes it to reality
seems to be quite low but the proposal does demonstrate an impressive single
mindedness on the part of the FCC chair.
The FCC is just about finished up with yet another
demonstration of short sightedness (this time mandated by Congress). They collected over $19 billion in bids
for the spectrum to be freed up by the move to all
digital broadcast TV. (See FCC hauls
in $19.6 billion for 700 MHz auction
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/031908-fcc-700nmhz-auction.html). This is, of course, $19B that will not
be available to build out the services to use the spectrum and, thus, a $19B
tax, inefficiently gathered by the carriers, on the eventual users of the
services. This is a lot of
money, but nit enough to also sell off the "D Block" that was to be
shared with public safety users.
So now the FCC has to try again to auction off this chunk of
spectrum.
I complained when the FCC set up
the rules for the auction that the FCC had failed to understand the potential
economic driver that an expansion of unlicensed spectrum could be. (See FCC ignores the lesson of Wi-Fi -
http://www.networkworld.com/columnists/2007/080707bradner.html) The news over the last few days could
be read that the FCC had rethought the situation and realized that I might have
had a point but there is no reason to think that happened.
The Wall Street Journal and others
reported that FCC Chair Kevin Martin was now talking up a proposal to auction
off a different chunk of spectrum with big strings attached. (See FCC considers offering spectrum
for free wireless Internet -
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/052908-fcc-considers-offering-spectrum-for.html?inform?ap1=rcb) The main strings are that some of the
spectrum would have to be set aside for free wireless Internet and that there
would be a requirement that the network be available to at least 50% of the
covered population within 4 years and to 95% within 10years. Oh, yeh, and one other string - use of
this free service would be censored so that users could not view pornographic
or obscene material.
The Journal reported that:
"Details about how to define what content would be unacceptable for
viewing over the free network is still under discussion." I bet.
I'm no constitutional lawyer but
it's hard to see how such a restriction could pass constitutional muster. For the FCC to succeeded it would have
to ignore multiple Supreme Court decisions knocking down congressional attempts
at censoring the Internet. (See, for example, Communications Decency Act material
at http://www.sobco.com/papers/index.htm.) The FCC is currently in court over its attempts to censor
broadcast TV. Any restriction like
the one would be instantly in court and, if history is any president, would be
tossed out.
Clearly, obscenity on the Internet
is a very real problem. A problem
to which there are only partially successful technical solutions. Even if it were constitutional,
network-based filtering is quite easily circumvented if both ends want to do
so. This is one reason that courts
have found that such requirements are ineffectual blunt instruments that do
more harm to legitimate information transfer than to the transfer of obscene
materials. But, you do have to
admire FCC Chair Martin - he stays focused on naughtiness in spite of anything
else going on.
disclaimer: I'm sure that some
hormone-influenced Harvard undergraduates can be quite naughty indeed but they
seem to be able to still figure out how to get an education. The university has not expressed an opinion
on the naughtiness fixations of commission chairmen, if there is one implied
above it is mine alone.