<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
	xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
	<channel>
		<title>Susan Crawford &#45; CircleID</title>
		<link>http://www.circleid.com/</link>
		<description>Postings from Susan Crawford on CircleID</description>
		<dc:language>en</dc:language>
		<dc:rights>Copyright 2008, unless where otherwise noted.</dc:rights>
		<dc:date>2008-10-15T13:58:01-08:00</dc:date>
		

		
		<item>
			<title> White Spaces News... Interesting First Step (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/20081015_white_spaces_fcc_first_step</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/20081015_white_spaces_fcc_first_step</link>
			<description><![CDATA[When the U.S. Digital Television Transition (DTV) transition happens in Feb. 2009, channels 2 through 51 will remain allocated for television transmission. Few of the nation's television markets actually use 49 channels. Indeed, most use less than half of that number... Today, with Congress in recess, leaving less room for last-minute-Lucy-with-the-football lobbying gambits, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) appears to be poised to release a report saying the white spaces can be used without necessarily causing interference to existing broadcasts. There are still many questions to be answered... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/20081015_white_spaces_fcc_first_step">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-10-15T13:58:01-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> McCain Tech Plan: The Only Vision is Backward-Looking (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/88152_mccain_tech_plan_vision_backward</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/88152_mccain_tech_plan_vision_backward</link>
			<description><![CDATA[So I've spent more time with the <a href="http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/CBCD3A48-4B0E-4864-8BE1-D04561C132EA.htm">McCain tech plan</a> today. At a time when this country is suffering economically and looking for fundamental change, it looks as if Sen. McCain is in the back office having lunch with a bunch of accountants. The heavy emphasis in the policy on tax cuts seems designed to appeal to people who equate lower taxes with progress. Haven't we already had years of that kind of approach? <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/88152_mccain_tech_plan_vision_backward">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-15T12:19:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Comcast and the Internet (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/88110_comcast_and_the_internet</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/88110_comcast_and_the_internet</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Today the FCC is condemning Comcast's practices with respect to P2P transmissions.I'm happy for FreePress and Public Knowledge today, and I know they have achieved a substantial change in the wind. The basic idea that it's not okay for network access providers to discriminate unreasonably against particular applications is now part of the mainstream communications discourse. That has to be good news. I'm concerned on a couple of fronts. The FCC has taken the view that it can adjudicate, on a case-by-case basis, issues that have to do with "Federal Internet Policy." They used that phrase several times... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/88110_comcast_and_the_internet">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-01T10:18:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Deep Packet Inspection: When the Man-In-The-Middle Wants Money (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/87287_dpi_man_in_middle_wants_money</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/87287_dpi_man_in_middle_wants_money</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Say you're walking down the sidewalk having a talk with your best friend about all kinds of things. What if you found out later that the sidewalk you were using wasn't really a sidewalk -- but instead a kind of false-front giant copying machine, unobstrusively vacuuming up what you were saying and adding to its database of information about you? Or, say you send a letter to a client of yours (to the extent you still do this), and it turns out later that your letter was intercepted, steamed open, and the contents were read... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/87287_dpi_man_in_middle_wants_money">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-07-28T19:04:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> BT and Ofcom (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/87168_bt_and_ofcom</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/87168_bt_and_ofcom</link>
			<description><![CDATA[About 16 months ago, I heard Ed Richards of Ofcom speak at a CITI conference at Columbia, and blogged about it <a href="http://scrawford.net/blog/ed-richards-ofcom/907/">here</a>. I remember thinking that Richards didn't seem to think that highspeed access to the internet was all that important. The market had to demand it, and the market wasn't being demanding. Also, he wasn't interested in government intervention to support highspeed access... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/87168_bt_and_ofcom">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-07-16T20:32:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Battling Over Clouds (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/87840_battling_over_clouds</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/87840_battling_over_clouds</link>
			<description><![CDATA[More than 40 years ago, the FCC was worried about telephone companies using their power over communications to control the then-nascent (and competitive) data processing marketplace. The Bell System at that point was already banned from providing services that weren't common carriage communications services (or "incidental to" those communications services)... In a 1999 article in the Texas Law Review, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Bickerstaff">Steve Bickerstaff</a> pointed out that Computer 1 meant that <em>no one</em> could provide a "computer utility" service... Today, we'd call the "computer utility" something different -- we'd use the term "cloud computing." <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/87840_battling_over_clouds">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-07-08T16:20:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Bit Caps, Consolidation, and Clearwire (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/86166_bit_caps_consolidation_clearwire</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/86166_bit_caps_consolidation_clearwire</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/15/technology/15cable.html?ex=1371355200&amp;en=c6ed330d9aa9a483&amp;ei=5124&amp;partner=permalink&amp;exprod=permalink">news</a> that Comcast, Time Warner, and AT&amp;T are all considering capping use of their networks -- so that "overuse" would trigger a charge -- has prompted intense discussion of just why these network operators are moving in this direction. One camp suggests that these operators have to do *something* to manage congestion, and because any protocol-specific discrimination plan raises howls of protest from the Net Neutrality side of the fence adopting bit-usage discrimination schemes is inevitable. It's the least-bad approach, following this view. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/86166_bit_caps_consolidation_clearwire">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-06-16T18:33:01-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Knowing Less (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/86119_knowing_less_internet_censorship</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/86119_knowing_less_internet_censorship</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/10/nyregion/10internet.html?ex=1370836800&amp;en=fec7075d10bb9bcc&amp;ei=5124&amp;partner=permalink&amp;exprod=permalink">announcement yesterday morning</a> in the Times that New York State AG Andrew Cuomo had reached an agreement with three US network operators (Verizon, Sprint, and Time Warner) about blocking child pornography was both less and more important than it appeared. It's less important in that part of the agreement covers something ISPs already do... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/86119_knowing_less_internet_censorship">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-06-11T09:11:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> The New Clearwire (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/85107_the_new_clearwire</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/85107_the_new_clearwire</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The new Clearwire could be game-changing, but the rules of the game may not be quite as Clearwire presents them. I have been wondering <a href="http://scrawford.net/blog/wimax-google-sprint-clearwire/968/">since last July</a> whether something significant would happen in the Google/Sprint world. The deal announcement earlier this weekseems to be that key development... In a nutshell, <a href="http://www.sprint.com/companyinfo/history/">Sprint</a> will contribute its substantial spectrum licenses in the 2.5 GHz range and its <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WiMAX">WiMAX</a>-related assets and intellectual property. Google, Intel, Comcast, Time Warner Cable, and Bright House Networks will invest a total of $3.2 billion. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/85107_the_new_clearwire">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-05-10T17:55:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> 700 MHz Update: Will VZ Comply with the Rules? (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/85520_700_mhz_update_verizon</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/85520_700_mhz_update_verizon</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Last Friday (HT: <a href="http://ipdemocracy.com">IPDemocracy</a>), Google filed a <a href="http://www.ipdemocracy.com/googlepetitiontodeny.pdf">petition</a> [PDF] asking that the Commission ensure that Verizon understands what those "open platform" requirements for the C Block really mean. Verizon has taken the position in the past that its own devices won't be subject to the "open applications" and "open handsets" requirements of the C Block rules, and Google says it is concerned that Verizon doesn't plan to follow those requirements in the future. This is big. Here's the background... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/85520_700_mhz_update_verizon">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-05-05T15:02:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Retrograde Inversion of Telecommunications Policy (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/retrograde_inversion_telecommunications_policy</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/retrograde_inversion_telecommunications_policy</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retrograde_inversion">Going backwards upside down</a>. That's what we're doing with telecommunications policy in the U.S. The Comcast affair should prompt a re-examination of many decisions the FCC, Congress, and the courts have made over the last few years. When the FCC reports on its reactions to Comcast's activities, the right response will be "You're asking the wrong question." "What is reasonable network management" isn't the question we should be asking... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/retrograde_inversion_telecommunications_policy">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-04-11T14:58:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Google and the White Spaces (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/83269_google_and_white_spaces</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/83269_google_and_white_spaces</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The white spaces proceeding is the next big opportunity for experiments in alternative ways of providing wireless highspeed internet access... A key advantage of unlicensed spectrum is that experiments in new technology can be carried out without asking the permission of spectrum licensees. To date, we have made very little spectrum available for unlicensed use and experimentation. The FCC has the discretion to decide whether the digital television "white spaces" may be used on an unlicensed basis... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/83269_google_and_white_spaces">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-03-26T10:14:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> 700 MHz Auction Winners: Why Block C Matters (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/83211_700_mhz_auction_winners_block_c</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/83211_700_mhz_auction_winners_block_c</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Today the FCC announced the winners of the 700 MHz auction -- and you can see from pp. 62-63 of this document that Verizon won Block C. (Block C was set up in two nationwide paired blocks of 11 MHz each, which were auctioned off in very large geographic areas -- 12 licenses, each covering a "Regional Economic Area Grouping". Verizon won seven of the twelve licenses, covering all of the US except Alaska, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands.) Why does this matter? <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/83211_700_mhz_auction_winners_block_c">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-03-21T14:19:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> Why Regulate Cable Internet Access (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/why_regulate_cable_internet_access</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/why_regulate_cable_internet_access</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The cable guys have their way of saying it: "What do you want to do, nationalize our businesses?" Another way of seeing this issue is: We have a very few very large providers of highspeed internet access in U.S. They have sufficient market power to decide how and when to prioritize internet communications. And all of these providers are competing with the internet in some way -- they are all (or are becoming) old media and old telecom companies that want to maintain control over their distribution channels. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/why_regulate_cable_internet_access">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-02-21T07:56:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> More on 700 MHz Block C Hits Reserve Price (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/813111_700_mhz_block_c_reserve</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/813111_700_mhz_block_c_reserve</link>
			<description><![CDATA[This is big... For the upper band C Block, the FCC mandated that any winning licensee have in place "no locking" and "no blocking" provisions conditioning its use of this spectrum: "Licensees offering service on spectrum subject to this section shall not deny, limit, or restrict the ability of their customers to use the devices and applications of their choice on the licensee..." The no-locking, no-blocking requirements were hedged in by substantial limitations... But it's still important... Particularly if Google is the winning bidder, something we may not know for a month or so. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/813111_700_mhz_block_c_reserve">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-01-31T12:26:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
	</channel>
</rss>