Paul Kapustka's Blog

« July 2006 | Main | September 2006 »

August 31, 2006

VONosphere Webisode #5

Webisode #5 of the VONosphere, our weekly take on all things IP commuications...

Topics: Jeff Pulver's guide to TV on the Net; AT&T bids for muni Wi-Fi deals.

Links:

Jeff's Guide to "TV Shows Only Available on the Internet"

Are big telcos leaning toward 'open' loops?

Verizon's Tauke: Muni broadband is OK

Posted by paul at 02:10 PM | Comments (0)

Andy on AOL's VoIP future

After Aswath Rao snuffed out the possibility that AOL will be signing off on its VoIP business, Andy Abramson weighs in on why AOL may be instead moving the industry forward, instead of simply departing.

Looking forward to hearing more from AOL in the Voice over IP arena... as well as from Ted Leonsis, who will be speaking at our upcoming Fall 2006 VON show.

Posted by paul at 11:02 AM | Comments (0)

August 29, 2006

Are big telcos leaning toward 'open' loops?

Maybe it's a stretch to think that AT&T and Verizon are suddenly going to shift course and allow competitors back into the line-sharing business, but conversations with reps from both companies last week in Aspen make me think we'll see more, and not fewer, open networks in the future.

Why the sudden optimism? First there was the very public statement by Verizon's Tom Tauke that the company now thinks private-public partnerships in (some) muni network-building efforts are O.K. (after actively opposing them in the not-so-distant past); then there were some private conversations with folks familiar with AT&T's plans who predicted a kinder, gentler Ma Bell when it comes to municipal network buildouts.

Both telcos, of course, lace any such talk with big caveats: That such networks must not use their governmental or taxation powers to compete directly with private-company efforts; and that they most likely need to be in areas where Verizon or AT&T wouldn't want to build broadband networks in the near-term future.

Good enough, I say. Anything that gets us closer to Bob Kahn's idea of an "open CO" or Reed Hundt's plan for fiber-izing the nation is a step in the right direction.

Guesses as to why the telcos are suddenly warm and fuzzy about the idea of muni nets? Maybe because they can feel the political winds as well as anyone, and no matter what you think of national broadband rankings, the growing anecdotal evidence of better, faster networks, cooler wireless gear, etc., all happening somewhere other than the U.S. has the same national-embarrassment factor as when our hoops team got slapped around a bit in the world forums.

Verizon's Tauke said last week that telcos need to make sure they are not behind the perception curve when it comes to buildouts, otherwise they face the risk of knee-jerk legislation:

"If we don't, the political pressure [brought by the absence of broadband] will cause government to act, perhaps prematurely," Tauke said.

On the anniversary of Katrina, one person close to AT&T's operations said that going forward, you won't see Ma Bell acting like BellSouth did, actively opposing the wireless networks that are still carrying a bunch of Internet traffic in the affected area.

While AT&T officials at last week's gathering wouldn't comment on the record about rumors of a deal with muni Wi-Fi upstart MetroFi, they do say publicly that anything that increases Internet traffic is good for a big backbone provider; whether or not that means AT&T and Verizon back down on lobbying against muni projects is something yet to be seen. But the sounds coming out of Aspen last week sure sounded like a peace offering, rather than a war cry. Let's hope so.

Posted by paul at 12:28 PM | Comments (0)

August 24, 2006

VONosphere Webisode #4

Webisode #4 of the VONosphere visits Aspen for the Progress & Freedom Foundation's annual summit.

Topics: Sumner Redstone, Disney and iTunes (and BitTorrent), Qwest's Richard Notebaert, Verizon and Video on the Net.

Links:

Verizon's Tauke: Muni broadband is OK

BitTorrent influenced Disney's iTunes move, exec says

Posted by paul at 05:14 PM | Comments (2)

August 22, 2006

Verizon's Tauke: Muni broadband is OK

ASPEN, Colo. -- In what seems like a bit of a departure from his company's sometimes very public anti-municipal networks stance, Verizon exec Tom Tauke said Tuesday that private-public partnerships to deliver broadband services are now "part of the solution" in delivering more broadband access in the U.S.

In his keynote speech to the Progress & Freedom Foundation's annual Aspen shindig, Tauke -- Verizon's top policy exec -- said that incumbent providers need to look closely at partnering with municipalities to ensure that they don't create a public groundswell that could result in what he called "premature" legislation that might enforce such plans.

"It's not feasible [for incumbents] to provide broadband to every part of the country -- not tomorrow, not next year," Tauke said. To make sure uncovered areas get broadband, Tauke said the industry "should do all it can" and "encourage public-private partnerships" to bring broadband to all.

"If we don't, the political pressure [brought by the absence of broadband] will cause government to act, perhaps prematurely," Tauke said.

Responding to a question after his speech, Tauke elaborated somewhat on the opinion, saying that as an individual he's wary of municipalities spending money on building networks ("they've turned out to be [economic] dogs"), he did confirm that "there is an open role for municipalities," especially in areas where Verizon can't make "an economic case" to provide service.

"If we can partner in some way with a WiMax, or Wi-Fi [deployment], that's totally appropriate," Tauke said.

Jim Cicconi, AT&T's top policy executive, concurred with Tauke's take, saying that as long as municipalities didn't try to compete with private providers (using their control of rights-of-way and taxing to help do so), public-private partnerships are a good idea.

"Everyone's looking at creative solutions," said Cicconi, who didn't comment on a rumored deal with MetroFi but said AT&T is already bidding on some municipal rollouts. "If the private sector isn't providing services, I don't blame cities for trying to build networks," he added.

Posted by paul at 10:35 AM | Comments (1)

August 21, 2006

BitTorrent influenced Disney's iTunes move, exec says

ASPEN, Colo. -- Seeing a high-quality copy of "Desperate Housewives" obtained 15 just minutes after the episode's airing was a seminal moment in Disney's corporate decision to offer parts of its content online (via Apple's iTunes store), said Disney exec Anne Sweeney in her keynote address Monday morning here at the Progress & Freedom Foundation's Aspen Summit.

Sweeney, whose numerous titles at Disney include that of president of the company's Disney-ABC television group, told a story about how a celebration of ratings success for "Housewives" was dimmed when a Disney employee showed Sweeney and others a copy of an episode obtained via BitTorrent just 15 minutes after it was broadcast.

Coming "face to face" with the high-quality, commercial-free pirated version, Sweeney said, told Disney that it was not just competing with other broadcasters, but with digital pirates -- and as such was an experience that "prompted us to [eventually] do the iTunes deal with Apple."

Calling the iTunes experiment as well as other online forays a business success -- "we are not cannibalizing our audience; it's additive," Sweeney said, citing company research -- Sweeney said to be on the lookout for a new player and more, more more online content from Disney properties sometime this Fall.

If time permits I will add to this later with more stats from Sweeney's talk, including download numbers; but the most important takeaway was that Disney, she said, doesn't see itself as just a broadcaster or a cable channel, but as a provider of content -- and will do all it can to make that content available to its viewers in whatever form they prefer.

Sound like the start of a revolution to you?

Posted by paul at 10:03 AM | Comments (0)

August 17, 2006

Illegal or necessary? Wiretapping is really a case of trust

Whether or not you agree with the judge who called the Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping a violation of the Constitution, there is an easier question to answer: Do you trust this administration when it says it's telling the truth?

Sure, nobody wants terrorists to succeed, and if there are terrorists out there who don't know how to use encrypted systems like Skype to make calls, hell yes, let's tap their phones.

But let's do it the right, legal way. Get warrants. Have oversight. Is there really a need to keep Congress and the Courts -- the other legs of balance on the great power stool -- out of the loop?

I'm not a legal expert but I am smart enough to know that when someone says they don't have to play by the rules, that's one sign that they shouldn't be trusted. And for the Bush team, it's another sign on a long road of truthiness.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is quoted in the Times story as saying:

“We’re going to do everything we can do in the courts to allow this program to continue,” he said, because it “has been effective in protecting America.”

Do you believe him, and by extension, the Bush adminstration scripting his words? I'd like to. In this case, I want to.

But where's the proof? Take their word for it?

While we still can in this country, make your opinion -- do you believe them, yes or no -- count this November.

BONUS LINK: Susan Crawford, as usual, has a very thorough analysis and explanation. And an opinion, too:

This may be too plain and workmanlike an opinion to survive the intellectual legerdemain of the best hired-gun appellate lawyer -- but it's right. It's a good day for the rule of law.

Posted by paul at 10:48 PM | Comments (0)

VONosphere Webisode #3

VONosphere Webisode #3

Topics: Digital Hollywood Building Blocks conference in San Jose; Advertising on 'Video on the Net,' everyone loves Chad Hurley.

Links: Everyone's watching YouTube (Paul Kapustka's Blog)

Posted by paul at 03:49 PM | Comments (0)

August 16, 2006

Everyone's watching YouTube

It's not just us here at planet Pulver who think that Video on the Net is a big, big idea. At Tuesday's Digital Hollywood Building Blocks confab, the cool kid in school was YouTube's Chad Hurley, who probably sprained a wrist shaking hands and exchanging business cards with his post-appearance throng o' groupies.

I don't think the crowd who wanted a piece of Hurley were waiting to talk about the company's service outage problems, nor were they particularly interested in what the new media it-exec had to say during his panel (I missed all but the end, but according to always-observant blogger and longtime industry journalist Dan Farber, Hurley didn't drop any new-think bombshells).

Mainly, they just wanted to grab that ultimate Silicon Valley face-time opp, to pass a business card and to try to impress in 10 words or less. Before he was hustled out of the room, Hurley seemed genial, kind and generally engaged with his crush of admirers. And lest you think the interest is only from those wishing to ride the coattails of the smoking-hot YouTube, be assured that the mainstream is watching Hurley as well.

When the panelists were asked what keeps them awake at night or what worries them about their business, Joe Michaels from Microsoft's MSN Entertainment division won points for honesty by declaring his biggest worry as "two words: You Tube."

More later on a good panel about advertising at the mini-conference, and watch for tomorrow's VONosphere show where you can see the throngs pressing Hurley like he was another Hurley or something.

Posted by paul at 09:29 AM | Comments (0)

August 11, 2006

VONosphere Webisode #2

This week's webisode of the VONosphere...

Links: Andy Abramson explains WiMax (video)

Posted by paul at 09:58 AM | Comments (1)

August 09, 2006

WSJ wrong on WiMAX -- and neutrality

It didn't take long for the Wall Street Journal's opinions editors to try to twist Tuesday's WiMax announcement from Sprint into some sort of proof that there is no need for net neutrality legislation since, gosh, look how fast the third pipe's being built. Too bad the facts (especially those dealing with licensed and unlicensed spectrum) don't support the WSJ's point of view.

In the Journal's unsigned editorial today, the paper says WiMax operates in unlicensed spectrum, meaning Sprint won't have to deal with regulators or FCC auctions. It also falls into the simplistic trap of calling WiMax just a big brother technology to Wi-Fi:

WiMax, meanwhile, operates in unlicensed spectrum, meaning Sprint doesn't have to shell out money in auctions to deploy the technology. WiMax is like a wireless home network or a hot-spot in a coffee-shop, but it works over much longer distances, allowing greater coverage and a wider variety of uses.

Such simplifications are just plain wrong, according to Glenn Fleishman, who pens the Wi-Fi Net News site. From a post yesterday, he notes:

I keep seeing phrases like “WiMax is Wi-Fi on steroids.” It’s not. Here’s why: The fundamental difference between WiMax and Wi-Fi is that WiMax is intended for licensed spectrum in which contention among providers with different interests is eliminated; Wi-Fi is designed for a hostile environment in which every party must accept interference within the legal limits without complaint.

Fleishman continues:

Before you get huffy out there and say, hey, there’s going to be unlicensed WiMax, too, or, there’s already unlicensed WiMax, think again. There is no unlicensed profile yet approved for WiMax. Any device that uses 5.8 GHz may be lovely, full of light and truth and the joy in exciting electrons into different states at high frequencies, but it isn’t certified WiMax. Further, the word is that there may never be a certified profile for the unlicensed bands.

The 5 GHz band gets a real workout, especially 5.8 GHz with its special point-to-point rules for higher signal gain, in metro-scale Wi-Fi networks because it’s the only affordable way to backhaul data, and by using highly directional signals, they can bypass quite a bit of the interference issues in that band. At least for now.

The WSJ edit then makes a strange comparison about regulatory opinions -- somehow using the emergence of cable-TV telephony (another network created with monopoly protection) as proof that line-sharing and other competitive attempts of the 1996 Telecom Act were "proven wrong" -- to say that if net neutrality legislation passes, it will happen just in time to throttle a new wave of supposed competition like Sprint's WiMax network.

While we here at the Paul Kapustka blog (that means me) welcome Sprint's WiMax plans, it's pretty optimistic to even call WiMax an operable standard yet, much less a competitor to copper wires or fiber to the home. The only working WiMax in the U.S. right now is the fixed version, and most services (like Clearwire's) apply the "pre-standard" euphemism, which is great unless you expect things to work together. Or expect economies of scale in equipment building.

In reality, the guess is that truly competitive WiMax networks will emerge in licensed, protected bands, which means that companies interested in making a buck in this arena will actually shell out huge dollars for spectrum, as the auction starting today will prove out. And who will be among the bidders? Who can afford it? Big companies, or small independents?

So yes, huzzah for Sprint and WiMax. We wish the deployment well. But in the meantime, let's keep the Internet truly open for the rest of us, and not just those who can afford higher fees.

BONUS LINK: We're not the only ones who read the WSJ piece and were shocked, yes shocked, that the nation's biggest business paper can't even do some simple fact-checking. Mike over at TechDirt follows a similar line of thinking here.

Posted by paul at 01:09 PM | Comments (0)

August 08, 2006

Sprint bets big on WiMAX for 4G

Confirming a report in the Wall Street Journal, Sprint Nextel on Tuesday confirmed that it's betting big on WiMAX for its long-expected 4G network rollout, bringing in WiMAX backers Intel, Motorola and Samsung as partners for a rollout that is supposed to go live by the end of 2007.

There are plenty of details in the WSJ piece (subscription required) and more undoubtedly soon to come, dissecting what it means for Sprint's partnerships with cable companies, what it means for Qualcomm, etc. etc.

But the big news as we see it is that this is the first true major independent commitment to WiMAX by a major U.S. service provider, and it is for Mobile WiMAX, the only version of the technology that will truly be able to compete going forward (current versions of pre-standard WiMAX, like Clearwire's, aren't mobile and require fixed base stations).

The announcement is really, really good news for Intel's Sean Maloney, a big mobile backer who needs WiMAX to win if he is to succeed in his new, more-important gig.

Posted by paul at 10:30 AM | Comments (0)

August 07, 2006

WSJ 'gets it' with online video series

Any question that Video on the Net is becoming a mainstream business issue was put to rest last week, when the Wall Street Journal blew out the doors with a weeklong series focusing on "Web Video Wars." From Tuesday's top headline ("Big TV's Broadband Blitz") to Friday's ("Plugging the Web Into the TV") the Journal's coverage showed in part that the paper was listening when our own Jeff Pulver talked to them eariler this summer.

Friday's WSJ was in an of itself a mini-snapshot of how TV on the Net is disrupting communications and media business; just check out this list of headlines from the Marketplace section:

Lead story: "Spectrum for Sale," a good preview of the wireless spectrum auction coming up this week, and how firms like cable companies might use the bandwidth to compete in the cellular and broadband markets.

Second story: "Advertisers Turn to eBay To Buy TV Time"
Feature story: "Plugging the Web Into the TV"
Side story: "Music You Can See: Warner Plans to Sell Albums on DVDs"

Inside stories:
"Sony and Rivals Seek Standard For Internet TV"

and then a few stories that show the disruption:
"CBS's Core Broadcast Revenue Slips"
"Sprint Net Falls Amid Fight For Users"
"Tribune and Chandlers Resume Talks on Differences" (about the struggles of Chicago Tribune Co., which spent heavily on broadcast stations)

Yes, it's a plug for our upcoming conference, but if the WSJ thinks these topics are important for business, shouldn't you?

Posted by paul at 01:40 PM | Comments (0)

August 04, 2006

Can wireless or BPL really be the 'third pipe?'

Even as FCC commissioners decry the cable-telco duopoloy that currently dominates the broadband Internet access scene here in the U.S., it's hard to ignore the signs that wireless technology delivery schemes -- and even broadband over power lines -- are moving closer on the Internet-access radar screen.

Case in point: From the very same public FCC meeting Thursday that prompted commissioner Michael Copps'declaration that "we are behind the game in putting high-speed, high-value bandwidth to work for all our citizens," the FCC did in fact unanimously vote to speed up the deployment of BPL and make more spectrum available for wireless net access, according to the National Journal's account of the meeting.

For BPL, the FCC basically said that it wouldn't ban the development of the technology, for the moment tossing out interference concerns of entities that include "ham" radio operators and TV broadcasters until there are more data. For wireless, the FCC said that the hoped-for 700 MHz chunk of spectrum that is supposed to be turned over by broadcasters by 2008 (betting line coming on this one soon) may be split into geographic chunks, giving smaller providers some hope in the bidding process.

Combine these actions with some on-the-ground happenings -- like the testing of a WiMAX/Wi-Fi blend to provide wireless access to train commuters in Silicon Valley, or the serious RFP process in the idea of building a Silicon Valley-wide free Wi-Fi net, and you have the seedlings of some hope that someday soon, real broadband alternatives may arise.

Sure, there are still a lot of technological hurdles to cross over, as always, but then again five years ago did you think you'd be downloading movies to something the size of a cell phone? At this point I would bet more heavily on wireless than BPL, only because I don't know much about BPL technology but I do know something about the relative (low) quality and stability of electrical wiring in houses, and not sure that's the best place for communications to go next.

Of course, I'd love to be proven wrong. Anne Broache's well-researched story over at C/Net provides more details about the BPL side of things.

Posted by paul at 01:34 AM | Comments (0)

August 03, 2006

VONosphere is now live!

In case you've been wondering what I have been working on here at Pulvermedia, wonder no longer and instead visit our new site: The VONosphere!

Thanks to all who helped preview and user-test the site... any comments, suggestions, etc., please send to paul.kapustka at pulvermedia.com.

Posted by paul at 12:03 PM | Comments (1)

August 02, 2006

The net neutrality 'transparency' widget is almost here!

Let me pat myself on the back for doing the easy work -- predicting it would happen -- while also pointing to an InfoWorld story that claims that a Seattle-based security researcher has devised a way to test for net neutrality.

The story goes on to say that:

The software can tell if computers are treating some types of TCP/IP traffic better than others -- dropping data that is being used in VOIP (voiceover Internet Protocol) calls, or treating encrypted data as second class, for example.

The software was supposed to be announced Wednesday, but there was no follow-up story on the InfoWorld site, and their blog from Black Hat came up empty on its promises for more info and silly photos. Ah well. We all know the trials of posting late night from Vegas, eh?

At least InfoWorld got a story on the proposed software... which is more than we can say for my former employer (and new Black Hat show owner) CMP Media, which apparently has a bunch of reporters there but no sign yet of any VoIP news... maybe they're all still at the party? Toga! TOGA!

Posted by paul at 11:08 PM | Comments (0)

Ed Whitacre video

Raw footage from the NARUC conference Tuesday...

Posted by paul at 04:06 PM | Comments (0)

Videoblogger in jail -- where's the outrage?

In a move that should put a chill into any videoblogger's spine, freelance journalist Josh Wolf was put in jail yesterday for refusing to turn over his tape to a grand jury. More details are here in a story by the San Francisco Chronicle, and some opinion is here on the Silicon Valley Watcher blog. Whether or not he is legally right, Wolf deserves support for showing some spine in the face of the rapidly increasing police-state actions against media freedom. Any legal big hitters out there to help keep Josh's back?

For more information from Josh himself (and for a link to contribute to his legal fund) visit his site.

Posted by paul at 02:03 PM | Comments (1)

August 01, 2006

Ed Whitacre, WiMAX user

SAN FRANCISCO -- It's good to be the boss of a telecom company, especially when you want WiMAX service set up at your rural ranch. That was the most exciting news from AT&T CEO Ed Whitacre during his speech to the NARUC summer gathering here Tuesday, along with a bunch of company-line updates on other pressing telecom topics like net neutrality and video over IP. More after the jump, and don't forget to check back later for Big Ed video highlights.

-- Net neutrality: Bonus smackdown honesty points to Whitacre for prefacing a quote from a Phoenix Center study (which purports that passing net neutrality rules will increase bandwidth costs) with the line "I'll be the first to tell you I don't know who they [the Phoenix Center] are."

[Editor's note: After which you could almost hear Phoenix Center president Larry Spiwak cringing from the back of the room.]

Instead of calling Google or Vonage nuts, Whitacre said that it would be "nuts" for AT&T to try to block any Internet services. "Nobody's going to block," he said. But Whitacre did say that AT&T is "not going to build [new] networks with no chance for [financial] return." He added that he was sure others in the online world would love for AT&T to build new networks so they could get "all the revenue and have no expenses," but that won't happen if Whitacre has his way. "Nobody gets a free ride," he said.

And: "It's best if [net neutrality] is worked out on a commercial basis," he added. [Editor's note: Those who have the gold...]

-- WiMAX: In addition to his own home network (which he said provides 5 Mbps downstream), Whitacre said AT&T is testing WiMAX and said it works "most of the time," but is "not ready for prime time yet."

-- TV: Whitacre noted that AT&T has 10 percent market share in San Antonio (the only launched market for its U-verse TV over IP service), and plans to have 15 more markets running before the end of the year. [Editor's note: Which is only a year behind schedule, but who's counting? Other than us?]

The U-verse service that is up and running isn't fully ripped, without the interactive and multiple-camera features that will supposedly make it better than vanilla cable. "It's not bad, but it's not where we want it to be," Whitacre admitted.

-- Soundbite: "You just can't call us a phone company anymore." [editor's note: especially when it comes to regulation!]

-- ICC: More honesty, as Whitacre said "I wouldn't confess to know" exactly what or how intercarrier compensation works. But he does know that AT&T "supports the [Missoula] plan," an effort backed by NARUC. "It's a good start," Whitacre said. [editor's note translation: "Just wait until Dorothy Atwood and Jim Cicconi get done with it."]

-- Soundbite: "We are committed to serve 5 million lower-income families" [with AT&T's new broadband services]. [editor's note translation: "Just as long as the lower-income families are willing to move into the rich neighborhoods where we'll be stringing fiber."]

-- Soundbite: About access lines: "Don't come to see us, we're not selling those."

-- UNE-P: When asked by host Tony Clark (commissioner and commissioner president of the North Dakota PUC) about what he likes or dislikes from the 1996 Telecom Act, Whitacre said UNE-P (also known as line sharing) is "burned in my brain," and not in a good way. Whitacre wondered aloud why people thought UNE-P was a good thing: "how many people [companies] got in with no skin in the game?" Whitacre wondered. [editor's note 1: maybe because there were only so many monopoly infrastructures to go around?] [editor's note 2: Seems to be working well for customers in Japan and France. And who has more skin in the game than customers?]

Smackdown score for Whitacre: 4.0, bonus for honesty but really very thin gruel for the audience of state PUC'ers.

Posted by paul at 01:49 PM | Comments (0)