Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., said Tuesday the committee plans to hold a classified briefing on federal spectrum holdings on March 19 in an undisclosed location. Some lawmakers and commissioners said that more must be done to identify and free federal spectrum holdings for commercial wireless use at the committee’s FCC oversight hearing Tuesday evening. (See separate report in this issue.)
Maryland bills that would extend Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) protections to in-state children would add teeth to self-regulatory efforts, Maryland Attorney General Doug Gansler said during an address on Tuesday at a Direct Marketing Association conference. Gansler is the president of the National Association of Attorneys General. The bills would allow Gansler’s office to prosecute websites that violate COPPA without involving the FTC and would require that websites directed to children label advertisements as such. “We got a ton of pushback from you guys, mostly,” on the bills, he said, speaking to a room of online advertising industry members. Although Gansler said there have been pushes to “table it for a year and come back next year,” a spokesperson from his office said he’s still working with industry members to craft amendments to the already-introduced legislation.
The FCC should start the incentive spectrum auction process by first identifying repacking scenarios, the NAB said in an executive summary of its reply comments on the proposed rulemaking notice. “This will help the Commission determine in what markets it needs volunteers, and how many of them, to produce a workable and efficient nationwide plan,” it said (http://bit.ly/13TKJ7I). That would let the FCC project what it can expect to raise in auction proceeds, the NAB said. Finally, it can direct its resources to providing incentives to stations in markets where it “truly requires volunteers,” it said. The trade association argued against adopting a variable or split band plan and urged the FCC not to use the repacking as a “pretext for a straight, government-directed reallocation,” of spectrum. In other replies that were posted to the FCC’s website before our deadline Tuesday other broadcasters addressed their concerns with ideas raised in the first round of comments. An anonymous broadcaster in “one of the largest -- and for the purposes of the incentive auction, most important -- markets” and represented by former FCC Chairman Richard Wiley urged the FCC to allow stations who choose to share channels to change their city of license while staying within a designated market area (DMA). Initial comments showed that the FCC’s tentative proposal to require sharing stations to meet existing community of license service obligations would prevent stations from entering into such arrangements, it said (http://bit.ly/ZxD3kl). “Due to the location of stations’ transmission facilities and their communities of license in the DMA, [the] Broadcaster does not appear to have a viable partner” whose facilities it could operate from, or who could operate from its facilities, it said. That would force “otherwise willing stations in the nation’s most important markets ... to sit on the sidelines rather than participate in the auction.” The operator of several affiliates of the ABC, CBS and NBC networks focused its comments on protecting stations that do not participate in the auction (http://bit.ly/YqdEYV). It also urged the agency to coordinate interference issues with Canada and Mexico. “The commission should take the time to analyze, and prepare appropriately flexible rules in response to the international coordination ... rather than straining to get underway quickly,” they said. An owner of Class A stations urged the FCC to set a future date, such as the commencement of the reverse auction, by which stations’ repacking protections would be calculated (http://bit.ly/ZxDtr3). Failure to do that would violate the Fifth Amendment, Venture Technologies Group said. “Arbitrarily cutting off repacking protection rights as for Feb. 22, 2012 would interfere with stations’ reasonable investment-backed expectations and amount to an impermissible regulatory taking,” it said. Spectrum Evolution, a Low-Power TV (LPTV) station operator, said the auction would lead to a “disastrous fate” for the LPTV industry unless the FCC gives it more attention. “What small business or new entrants would be foolish enough to invest in spectrum technology in the future when their fate would be governed by an agency that seems willing to sweep them aside, take resources they have worked so hard to develop and sell those resources to the wealthiest available buyer without a nod or nickel to those from whom the resources were taken” it said (http://bit.ly/ZxEkrC).
Google will pay $7 million to settle claims with dozens of states regarding its unauthorized collection of data from unsecured Wi-Fi points through the company’s Street View vehicles, Connecticut Attorney General George Jepsen said Tuesday (http://1.usa.gov/ZjOI7I). Connecticut led the eight-state “executive committee,” which included Arizona, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Missouri and Texas, that investigated the matter for two years and negotiated what’s known as an assurance of voluntary compliance with Google, Jepsen’s office said. Attorneys general from 38 states and the District of Columbia signed the agreement to resolve consumer protection and privacy claims. “The importance of this agreement goes beyond financial terms,” Jepsen said: The pact recognizes consumers “reasonable expectation of privacy” and ensures Google “will not use similar tactics in the future” to get personal data. The pact (http://1.usa.gov/X48wKN) requires Google to engage in a “comprehensive employee education program” about privacy or confidentiality of user data; sponsor a nationwide public service campaign to educate consumers about securing wireless networks, through a “how-to” YouTube video, “daily online ads for two years” about the video, a post on its public policy blog explaining the value of encrypted networks, half-page ads in national and state newspapers and an educational pamphlet about online safety; and continue to secure “and eventually destroy” Street View data collected between 2008 and March 2010, Jepsen’s office said. The company agreed to “corporate culture changes,” including “direct notification of senior management, supervisors and legal advisors” about the pact’s terms and development of policies for responding to “identified events” involving unauthorized data collection or use, his office said. As lead state, Connecticut will get nearly $521,000 in the settlement. New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said separately (http://bit.ly/10BwT58) his state’s share will be about $192,000.A spokeswoman for Google told us that while “we work hard to get privacy right ... in this case we didn’t,” and the company “quickly tightened up our systems to address the issue. The project leaders never wanted this data, and didn’t use it or even look at it.” The company is “pleased” to have worked with Jepsen and other attorneys general, she said.
The Global Network Initiative started a two-year collaboration with the eight companies that make up the Telecommunications Industry Dialogue on Freedom of Expression and Privacy, the GNI said Tuesday (http://bit.ly/13TifLn). The GNI, founded in 2008, includes Microsoft, Google, Yahoo, Websense and several digital freedom and human rights groups; the Industry Dialogue, which has met since 2011 to discuss freedom of expression and privacy in telecom, consists of Alcatel-Lucent, France Telecom-Orange, Millicom, Nokia Siemens Networks, Telefonica, Telenor, TeliaSonera and Vodafone. The GNI will house the work of the Industry Dialogue and provide a “common platform to exchange best practices, learning, and tools,” and the two groups “aim to find a shared and practical approach to promoting freedom of expression and privacy rights around the world,” GNI said. It believes “strength lies in numbers” and pursuing shared goals, said GNI Executive Director Susan Morgan. The Industry Dialogue developed guiding principles (http://bit.ly/WOTHvt) on telecom and freedom of expression and privacy, which will “form the beginning of a more extensive external dialogue with key stakeholders,” GNI said. GNI noted the telecom companies weren’t joining its organization, and that a “review process” will assess their collaboration over the next two years. The collaboration will help GNI learn from telecom companies “the complex human rights challenges they face,” and telecom companies can learn from GNI how to “develop an accountable system to safeguard human rights,” said Arvind Ganesan, director-business and human rights at Human Rights Watch, in GNI’s statement. Google hopes the arrangement “will give the eight [telecom] companies the chance to see the advantages we've found in an alliance that goes beyond industry and includes NGOs and others,” said Bob Boorstin, director of public policy, and Lewis Segall, senior counsel for ethics and compliance, in a Google blog post (http://bit.ly/16pkQfn).
A California-based scammer now plagues the region around St. Louis, Mo., the Better Business Bureau warned this week (http://bit.ly/W71vg20. The company that BBB rates “F,” with more than 900 complaints against it and 700 in the last year alone, has led to “the scrutiny of attorneys general in at least 10 states,” the bureau said. It said the probes are for distributing “misleading invoices to businesses, schools and nonprofit groups,” under the names of US-Telecom Inc., US Telecom, UST Development Inc. or UST, with addresses listed in California. “The mailing appears to be a bill requesting a $425 payment, but actually is an attempt to sell a maintenance agreement for telecommunications systems,” the bureau said.
Several commenters support Sprint Nextel’s request that the FCC determine “now rather than upon completion of 800 MHz band reconfiguration” that Sprint has effectively met a requirement of the FCC’s landmark 800 MHz rebanding order and won’t owe the government a windfall payment. The 2004 order required Nextel to pay out the full value of the 10 MHz national spectrum license it got as part of the order in rebanding costs or pay the balance to the government. “As detailed in the Sprint Petition, the Commission has adequate cost and payment information available to make a determination that Sprint’s expenditures exceed the Commission’s anti-windfall payment threshold and therefore Sprint does not and will not owe an ‘anti-windfall’ payment to the U.S. Treasury under the terms and provisions of the Commission’s 800 MHz Reconfiguration Plan,” Sprint said (http://bit.ly/Wl9l4E). It said Dish Network is “the only commenting party that is not an 800 MHz stakeholder impacted by 800 MHz band reconfiguration, [and] is also the only commenter that fails to recognize the value in undertaking the anti-windfall analysis without further delay.” Dish said (http://bit.ly/WG8tdf) “Sprint’s request is not supported by adequate documentation, and further scrutiny of Sprint’s claimed expenditures is needed before the Commission can reasonably determine that no ‘anti-windfall’ payment is required."
Bright House Networks and Time Warner Cable petitioned to be excluded from municipal rate-setting for basic-video and some other prices in more (CD March 12 p15) communities this week, said filings posted in FCC docket 12-1. Both Media Bureau petitions cited video competition from DirecTV and Dish Network, and Time Warner Cable also cited Cincinnati Bell’s pay-TV service. Bright House wants findings of effective competition in Florida’s Winter Springs and the counties of Lake Mary, Oviedo and Seminole (http://bit.ly/ZGuQvF), while Time Warner Cable’s request for deregulation covers Hillsboro and five other Ohio municipalities, and West Harrison, Ind. (http://bit.ly/XGmJ47).
Mobile and online advertisers shouldn’t display ads on devices or platforms where necessary disclosures can’t be made “clearly and conspicuously,” the FTC said Tuesday (http://1.usa.gov/13RqHuh) in releasing updated guidance known as the Dot Com Disclosures. The guidance (http://1.usa.gov/13U7Uin), updated for the first time since it was first released in 2000, tackles the issue of ad disclosures on smartphones and social media. “If a disclosure is needed to prevent an online ad claim from being deceptive or unfair, it must be clear and conspicuous,” the FTC said. Disclosure should be “clear and conspicuous on all devices and platforms” consumers might use to view the ad. Whereas the guidance issued in 2000 said advertisers should consider the disclosure’s proximity to the relevant ad claim -- and defined “proximity” as “near, and when possible, on the same screen” -- the updated guidance said disclosures should be “as close as possible” to the relevant claim. Advertisers should avoid using hyperlinks for disclosures “that involve product cost or certain health and safety issues,” both the 2000 and updated guidance say, while the updated guidance tells advertisers to label hyperlinks “as specifically as possible” and consider how hyperlinks will function on various programs and devices. Even “space-constrained” ads, such as those in social media, require disclosures “necessary to prevent an ad from being deceptive,” and such disclosures shouldn’t be conveyed in pop-ups “because they are often blocked.” Then Commissioner Jon Leibowitz didn’t participate in the otherwise unanimous vote approving the staff guidance. The new guidance includes several examples of mock ads that conform to or violate its recommendations. One ad for “imitation pearl” earrings notes that the ad correctly puts the disclosure “imitation” next to the product “pearl,” while another ad for 3/4-carat diamond earrings is misleading because it puts the disclosure -- that “diamond weights may not be exact” -- after a large blank space following the ad text. An ad for an Internet-connected home monitoring system is deceptive because it puts the disclosure -- the service requires a $9.99 monthly subscription -- in a different column “rather than directly under the price information” for the monitoring camera itself. Users viewing that non-mobile-optimized ad on a mobile device also could miss the disclosure because they click to zoom on the main body of text and “might not scroll left” to see the disclosure, the guidance said.
Sprint Nextel’s bid to buy remaining control of Clearwire “significantly” undervalues the “true value of Clearwire’s technology opportunities and wireless spectrum holdings,” said former FCC Commissioner Harold Furchtgott-Roth and the Analysis Group in a study commissioned by Clearwire shareholder Crest Financial. Crest submitted the study to the FCC as part of the commission’s review of Sprint’s proposed buyout, which Crest officially opposes (http://bit.ly/XGiB4l). The study supports the argument Crest has made in other FCC filings that “Sprint’s acquisition of Clearwire would harm not only Clearwire shareholders but also the public at large,” Crest said in a news release. “The public would be better served if Clearwire was able to offer its spectrum to multiple customers.” Sprint’s offer of $2.97 per share for Clearwire is well below valuations estimated by two firms advising Clearwire’s board, the report said. The two firms valued Clearwire’s remaining stock at between $9.54 and $15.50 per share, the report said. Sprint’s offer also “fails to account for Clearwire’s unique ability to deploy wireless technology that offers far greater future value than the technology currently offered by most major U.S. carriers,” the report said. Clearwire controls the 2.5 GHz band, “the only band of spectrum in the U.S. that can be developed for TDD-LTE services,” the report said. Sprint’s offer ignores “both the value ascribed to similar spectrum in recent transactions and the fact that Clearwire’s spectrum holdings, together with its technology offerings, are well-suited for use by multiple carriers,” Crest said. A Sprint spokesman declined to comment on the Crest study, but noted that a study it released last week showed that “due to the varying characteristics of the 2.5 GHz spectrum, the Sprint-Clearwire merger agreement provides a reasonable valuation of the 2.5 GHz spectrum, with a substantial premium over the high-end valuation” (http://bit.ly/ZjU0Ai).