Slashdot Log In
Verizon Sues FCC over 700MHz Open Access Rules
Posted by
Zonk
on Thu Sep 13, 2007 06:09 PM
from the hit-em-where-it-hurts dept.
from the hit-em-where-it-hurts dept.
Carterfone writes "Verizon is upset at the open access conditions for the 700MHz spectrum auction, and they're going to court to get them overturned. The company has filed a lawsuit in the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, urging the court to overturn the rules. 'In its petition for review, Verizon argues that the FCC exceeded its authority in mandating the two open access conditions, accusing the Commission of being "arbitrary" and "capricious," and saying that the rules are "unsupported by substantial evidence and otherwise contrary to law." Google is critical of Verizon's lawsuit: 'It's regrettable that Verizon has decided to use the court system to try to prevent consumers from having any choice of innovative services. Once again, it is American consumers who lose from these tactics.'"
Related Stories
[+]
Hardware: FCC Goes Halfway On Opening 700 MHz Spectrum 192 comments
The FCC has set rules for the upcoming auction of 700-MHz spectrum and they went halfway on the four open access principles that Google and others had called for. The agency said yes to "open devices" and "open applications," thus requiring the auction winner to permit consumers to use any device or application on the network. But the FCC turned down "open services" and "open networks," so the winners will not be obligated to let others buy access at wholesale prices in order to offer network services. This vote would seem to mean that Google won't bid in the spectrum auction. Ars has a more in-depth look at the outcome.
Firehose:Verizon sues FCC over 700MHz open access rules by Anonymous Coward
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Verizon. (Score:5, Insightful)
> Under the FCC's rules, whoever wins the spectrum auction must allow consumers to use any device and any lawful application on their networks.
No wonder they're pissed.
Verizon: We never stop working... for ourselves.
Shaking Heads (Score:2, Funny)
But there's no justice in the universe. Just judges.
no suprise (Score:5, Insightful)
Verizon wants you to do it their way, and really wants to force it upon you. when they bought GTE they tried to treat landline customers the way they treated cellular customers, they got nailed hard in court over that one.
Re:no suprise-DETAILS PLEASE (Score:3, Interesting)
Details please. I love a good smackdown!
Re:no suprise-DETAILS PLEASE (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/0/006/ripoff0006518.htm [ripoffreport.com]
http://www.phoneplusmag.com/articles/0c1rnew4.html?cntwelcome=1 [phoneplusmag.com]
tons more. Verizon has tried their hardest to screw the customer for a really long time.
Parent
Re:no suprise (Score:4, Informative)
IS-95/CDMA2000 has supported R-UIMs, the Qualcomm equivalent of the SIM card, for about five years now, but Verizon doesn't issue R-UIMs. They can provide them, they choose not to.
Parent
Surprise! (Score:5, Funny)
Can you hear me now? No? Good.
"for the consumer!" (Score:4, Interesting)
'It's regrettable that Verizon has decided to use the court system to try to prevent consumers from having any choice of innovative services. Once again, it is American consumers who lose from these tactics.'"
That's pretty funny, coming from a company which prohibited its Adword customers from discussing anything about the Adwords program with others.
Google late paying you one month? Don't post anything about it on your website, or boom, you weren't a customer anymore. I took a quick glace through the terms and couldn't find it; maybe they finally nix'd it.
PS: We're not CONSUMERS. We are PEOPLE, who MAY be CUSTOMERS.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Probably ad supported, but seems like we're getting closer and closer all the time to a Google antitrust investigation, the way that MS was investigated. To some extent it surprises me that Google was allowed to purchase double click. Should Google purchase that part of the spectrum and fund it w
Help the FCC lawyers! (Score:2, Interesting)
Wahhh (Score:5, Insightful)
Writer not from Slashdot (Score:5, Funny)
I'll bet a couple of people around here were wondering how they misspelled "loose".
Running Scared (Score:5, Insightful)
Verizon's move vacates its primary contention. The open access rules are going to make the bidding intense because those who want to keep the other two open access rules off the table are going to being bidding heavily. Moreover, it is quite likely that Verizon and others will, if the two existing open access rules stick, attempt to buy up the bands and then simply not build or activate the infrastructure, thereby trapping consumers into the other bands where they are not subject to these rules.
Point being, this is sleight of hand. Their real move is going to be trying to buy the bands and keep them dark. Therefore, the bands are worth more with these rules in place than without and Verizon's contention that the FCC is disenfranchising the government of revenue by adding these rules is void.
Re:Running Scared (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What they didn't say is This spectrum should be available to the public under fair and decent pricing or anything of the like; they only added the two "Google Caveats". The phone companies could build up the entire infrastructure on top of existing infr
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Running Scared (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If you would have read those very same rules a bit more closely, you would realize that the Public Safety bands and the Commercial bands are two different bands being auctioned off independently. The "C" block auction is the one that has these two rules attached that Verizon is trying to get thrown out.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070815
Why Verizon's Claims are Total B.S. (Score:3, Insightful)
Total B.S.! If I can use any device, then I can use the most innovative devices from anyone building them. If Version provides the most new and innovative wireless services at a fair price, they get my business. If someone else does, my business goes there. In short, Version contradicts themselves in the very same sentence.
As for reducing the revenue the government will receive from the spectrum auction, like how does that happen? Is Verizon going to pay a bazillion dollars for the spectrum if you have to buy only their devices and services afterwards, and that no one will buy a single Hz of it otherwise? I doubt that!
It's all such total B.S. from Verizon that nobody should be taking them seriously for a single instant -- and throw those blighters out of court!
A good example here (Score:4, Insightful)
If any of you ever felt like you might want to write some letters or make some phone calls, this would be a good time. Keep in mind that Verizon won't be hurt in any way if they don't get this frequency band. It's you and I that'll get hurt if they do...
Regrettable but predictable (Score:5, Informative)
I hope Google is willing to go to court because this simply will not end. Verizon will sue infinitely to delay the auction if they don't get what they want, and if the auction happens they will sue infinitely to block usage of the spectrum or to block open access. They've proven that nothing is enough for them.
Selling spectrum is short sighted idea (Score:4, Insightful)
Imagine the day you are carrying a little device in your pocket. This device is an all in one thing. It has a software defined radio in it, a reasonable sized display (3in diagonal maybe, 800x600 pixels?), some kind of keyboard, a microphone and a speaker. You can make phone calls, instant message, and almost any other form of communication. The infrastucture is WiFi, WiMax, CDMA, GSM, 3/4G, point to point, HDTV, AM, FM, XM, Sirius, GPS, pager, bluetooth and zigbee on whatever frequency is appropriate (remember software defined radio, it can do all of this in software).
You pick up the device, it has an address. You wish to communicate with someone else, they have an address. The device knows them, and their address. Through the infrastructure, Your device can find their device, picking the most suitable communication mechanism available. If they are in the same room, it'll do point to point, if they are in the same building, it'll do WiFi. Across town, maybe your device will do CDMA, and theirs will do GSM. Want to send email to someone, it'll figure out a route.
The only way this will work, is opening up everything. The spectrum, especially will have to be unencumbered (not owned). The carriers will have to act like carriers, accepting these all purpose devices, without a monopoly.
Sure verizon and ATT will scream, it isn't good for anyone. But actually it will work in their and our best interest. Their infrastructure could be more efficiently used (won't have to handle calls to the guy in the next cube). Sure we may have to pay what it costs to utilize their network instead of a flat fee, with silly gimicks. Initial purchase price will a little high (device not bundled with the service). They won't have to service the devices, or they could, if they build their own.
To get here, the spectrum that has already been sold will have to be returned to the rightful owners (us), and that will be expensive!!! The government could claim eminant domain, but that would probably be even less popular, and the lawsuits would probably cost even more money. We need to stop selling spectrum NOW!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
* - this was just picked as the first result I got for the search for the price. No need to pay too much attention
Re:I dont' like companies like Verizon (Score:5, Insightful)
If it makes you feel any better, I'm in the same boat until March. I do plan to terminate my service with them primarily on their constrictive practices. What I find particularly distasteful is that they push legislation that practically makes it a legal requirement to bleed their customers with fees. Fees that seem to inevitably return to Verizon's pockets.
Parent
Re:I dont' like companies like Verizon (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent