---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Bruce Kushnick <[email protected]> Date: Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 12:04 PM Subject: Fast Lane, Slow Lane -- "No Lane" -- End Game in Telecommunications To: (Excerpted from the new book: *The Book of Broken Promises: $400 Billion Broadband Scandal and Free the Net <http://newnetworks.com/bookofbrokenpromises.htm>**) * * Fast Lane, Slow Lane -- "No Lane" -- End Game in Telecommunications* http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-kushnick/fast-lane-slow-lane--no-l_b_586... Forget about Net Neutrality's fast lane vs slow lane. We are at the end game in telecommunications and we should all be talking about the "No Lane". Net Neutrality is like one of those Rorschach Tests used in psychological examinations where everyone sees something different in the same picture. With a record 3.7 million comments filed at the FCC in the Open Internet proceeding, <http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/16/6257887/fcc-net-neutrality-3-7-million-comments-made> as of September 15th, 2014, one thing is clear -- America is angst-ridden about something. The most common theme in the last round of comments filed is now the-easy-to-remember chant -- "fast lane vs slow lane", while over the last decade it has referred to the blocking or degrading of service. But the truth is -- the angst is not only from 'Net Neutrality'. According to an ACSI survey, <http://bgr.com/2014/05/20/comcast-twc-customer-satisfaction-survey-study/> in 2014, Comcast and Time Warner are leading the list as the "most hated companies in America", while "ISPs", (actually the phone and cable companies, including AT&T and Centurylink) were also at the bottom of customer satisfaction. While Net Neutrality focuses on important issues, it doesn't address or cure anything to do with stopping the "No Lane"-- the end game if AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and Time Warner continue on their path. These companies are the incumbent wireline and cable companies that control most of the wires in the US and that also means that they control all wireless services. Control of the wires also gives them control over all services, including competitor services, but more importantly it gives them the ability to control who gets upgraded and who doesn't, or what prices customers' pay, or worse, who will be 'shut off' and end up in a 'Digital Dead Zone'. How bad is the broadband 'landscape'? A recent speech by FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler <http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2014/db0904/DOC-329161A1.pdf>brings the "No Lane", filed with the "have nots", into focus. "At the low end of throughput, 4 Mbps and 10 Mbps, the majority of Americans have a choice of only two providers. That is what economists call a "duopoly", a market place that is typically characterized by less than vibrant competition." "At 25 Mbps, there is simply no competitive choice for most Americans. Stop and let that sink in...Three-quarters of American homes have no competitive choice for the essential infrastructure for 21st century economics and democracy. Included in that is almost 20 percent who have no service at all!" "Things only get worse as you move to 50 Mbps where 82 percent of consumers lack a choice." Ironically, (as we mentioned in our previous article <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-kushnick/the-book-of-broken-promis_b_5839394.html>), America's customers have been charged about $400 billion dollars to have the entire US upgraded to fiber optic services by 2010, or there abouts, with speeds of at least 45 Mbps in both directions -- and that was the speed of broadband in 1992; by 2014, we should have been a 'gigabit nation'. Wheeler, unfortunately, appears to be in denial about the other pressing issues -- And it is going to get worse. *The "No Lane": Shutting off the Copper -- and Force-Migrating to Wireless.* At an investor meeting, a CITI Investment Research <http://seekingalpha.com/article/2162303-verizon-communications-management-discusses-q1-2014-results-earnings-call-transcript> analyst asked Fran Shammo, Verizon's CFO, about "the homes where you don't have FiOS. I think it's... maybe roughly 8 million homes...". Fran Shammo responded <http://seekingalpha.com/article/2162303-verizon-communications-management-discusses-q1-2014-results-earnings-call-transcript>: 'VoiceLink' and 'harvesting' are the plan. "Outside of the FiOS footprint obviously, really we are taking two measures there. One is the Wireless portfolio and replacing some of that that old voice legacy copper voice with our LTE voice product that Wireless has been selling across the nation for almost two years now called Home Phone Connect. Within Wireline, they have a very similar product called VoiceLink which in essence is the same thing. "So we will try to replace that copper legacy with those technologies. But look, I mean, outside, this is kind of where you say it's you have to nurture it and harvest what you have and we know that we are not going to be able to compete with speed in that environment and we will continue to do the best we can." Harvesting customers is essentially getting as much profits out of a customer as possible by raising rates until the customer screams uncle and leaves, or stays but is being gouged. But the primary goal is to shut off the copper, so make as much as possible until then. Meanwhile, VoiceLink caused a revolt on Fire Island <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-kushnick/fire-island-erupts-over-v_b_3531584.html>, New York. After the Sandy Storm, Verizon's plan was to not fix the copper utility networks in various parts of New York and New Jersey and force customers onto a 2G-styled wireless service called VoiceLink. Fire Island residents attacked this plan and in 2014 they were wired with fiber optics; Mantoloking New Jersey wasn't as fortunate or vocal and is still forced onto VoiceLink. Unfortunately, AT&T has an identical plan, but they call it the "IP Transition". This chart, supplied by AT&T to the FCC, is the current and after picture about its plans for the Carbon Hill Alabama Internet Protocol (IP) transition trials, which is supposed to migrate customers from the current networks to Internet-based networks. [image: 2014-09-23-attcarbonhill.png] <http://images.huffingtonpost.com/2014-09-23-attcarbonhill.png> In this rather jaw-dropping chart we see that AT&T will shut off 60% of working wired services to be replaced with their own wireless service, while 4% can't get anything upgraded so far. And their wireless product includes a VoiceLink-like service. (I note that as of the filing, VoiceLink couldn't do data applications or Internet service.) How exactly does shutting off the working phone lines (and not upgrading the customers), or worse, replacing the line with an inferior and expensive wireless service constitute a "transition" to IP protocols exactly? *Net Neutrality's Broadband Utility Push and the Disconnect. * To read the Rest: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-kushnick/fast-lane-slow-lane--no-l_b_586... Bruce Kushnick, Executive Director New Networks Institute ------------------------------ <http://www.avast.com/> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus <http://www.avast.com/> protection is active. -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/
