Comments on: FCC to Review Innovation in the Wireless Industry

By: GigaOM Special Event: FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski to Talk Broadband Policy Wednesday at 10AM – GigaOM

Tue, 05 Jan 2010 23:41:40 +0000

[...] partly by an activist Federal Communications Commission that is delving into broadband access, competition and innovation. Those stories are hot also because broadband plays more of a role in our day-to-day lives, which [...]

By: Sweden: A Model for the Broadband Future? – GigaOM

Sweden: A Model for the Broadband Future? – GigaOM — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 16:58:47 +0000

[...] broadband infrastructure affects competition, and I thought it would be good to highlight since the FCC is embarking on a similar effort focused on the wireless industry. Sweden is a leader in broadband penetration, has some of the [...]

By: Docs Want Their Own Airwaves and Other Gems From the FCC Wireless Probe

Docs Want Their Own Airwaves and Other Gems From the FCC Wireless Probe — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 00:01:22 +0000

[...] have filed their comments addressing the Federal Communications Commission inquiry about competition and innovation in the wireless industry, and they’re pretty much what one would expect. The major wireless carriers go to great [...]

By: Did Family Guy cause 179,997 FCC indecency complaints? | linkthe.com

Did Family Guy cause 179,997 FCC indecency complaints? | linkthe.com — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 16:39:44 +0000

[...] FCC to Review Innovation in the Wireless Industry (gigaom.com) [...]

By: Keith Higgins

Keith Higgins — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 16:45:40 +0000

The good news is that the device makers, big Internet companies and carriers are in a competitive (and hugely funded) race to deliver the best subscriber experience to extract the most subs and $$ from the mobile Internet revolution. This will drive significant innovation without any intervention and in fact already has. (look at the JIL initiative for example) And ironically enough in this broken love triangle, they all need each other for this phenom to reach its full potential so it will get more interesting soon…getcha popcorn ready….

By: Not Bjango's Fault | It's Just Justin

Not Bjango's Fault | It's Just Justin — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 15:39:06 +0000

[...] FCC to Review Innovation in the Wireless Industry (gigaom.com) [...]

By: Tom Burnett

Tom Burnett — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 21:43:39 +0000

I’m amazed at the amount of people thrilled that the FCC is sticking their nose in business decisions…in a capitalistic society. So what’s next, FCC walks into Best Buy and says “we don’t care if you don’t want to sell that product, we’re telling you that you must”????? That’s where this is all heading folks. If you don’t like the way a company does business, voice your opinion with your purchase patterns (buy a competing brand). But nobody is doing that. They continue to buy Apple and then complain…but still won’t put the Apple device down. Apple has always been proprietary. No government agency should be telling them they “have to be open or accept any app”! Guess what…IT’S THEIR PRODUCT, just like the iPod and the iPhone, and last time I checked we lived in a capitalistic society that rewards innovation and risk with money. Government has no right getting involved in Apple or AT&T business. If Apple did not have exclusivity agreements with telcos, they wouldn’t be able to guarantee a return on their investment. For the record, I’m not a fan of Apple or At&T. But, Apple took a huge risk and spent a huge amount of money on developing the iPhone. It succeeded. Now they deserve to reap the rewards. I notice alot people on here complaining but still using an iPod or iPhone. Why is that? Because Apple got it right. And if they wouldn’t have gotten it right Palm WebOS, Google Android, and a revamp of Windows Mobile would never happen. Apple products have spawned outstanding competitor products. You don’t like how Apple does business, stop using their products and stop your whining. We’re all sick of it. By the way, does anyone realize the horrible precedent that FCC involvement is setting here. Once government dictates how a business is supposed to be run, what’s next? We’re heading down a horrible path here… and over what? A phone or iPod????

By: Joe

Joe — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 19:47:31 +0000

@ Brett: “There are plenty of neat phones like the iPhone; there’s no need to kill competition by banning the business model that made the iPhone possible.”

Pure garbage. The iPhone is head and shoulders above the competition from both a mobile app store and form factor perspective. Period. Apple knows it, that’s why they pull these shenanigans (see additional Slingplayer example below). AT&T knows it, that’s why they can charge ridiculous prices for their data plans. The Android app store opportunity is compelling and growing as recent AdMob data shows, but most Android phones are weak and uninspiring. The only other strong contender in my mind for iPhone in terms of phone form factor and software UI is the Pre, and we all know how well their app store is going…

The iPhone business model has been trail-blazing, so not all of this Apple criticism is justified. But, clearly their culture of secrecy, lack of transparency and reactive PR (since when is Phil Schiller reaching out to bloggers weeks after the fact about app store rejections a communications strategy??) is what got them into this FCC mess in the first place. The previous banning of video-streaming app Slingplayer while paid, partner apps like ESPN mobile are allowed is yet another case of Apple playing by their own rules.

I hope the FCC won’t give up this easily.

By: Brian

Brian — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 18:51:21 +0000

@ Todd

Awesome comparison!

By: Todd

Todd — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 18:01:11 +0000

Simply passing the latest draft of Net Neutrality would address all this.

P.S.

@Brett Glass, @Kevin Walsh

Gentlemen, go back to reading Atlas Shrugged :P

If Microsoft started blocking apps from being installed on Windows computers because they competed with one of their apps, they’d be instantly sued for anti-trust.

Why are you giving Apple a free pass?

By: Kevin Walsh

Kevin Walsh — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 17:24:13 +0000

Maybe I woke up in a parallel universe this morning but (to borrow Barney Frank’s recent town hall rejoinder), on the planet I spend most of my time, governments play no role in innovation. Innovation has been the result of venture capital firms investing in entrepreneurial startups seeking to become the next Microsoft, Apple, or Google. In fact, these innovative companies are generally most successful (and most innovative) in markets exhibiting the least government interference.

Don’t get me wrong, the FCC has a legitimate role to play. But a government agency “promoting innovation” is an oxymoron.

By: Brett Glass

Brett Glass — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 17:02:32 +0000

Handset exclusivity promotes innovation by providing the funding required for research and development. Likewise, application exclusivity promotes competition, as we have seen in the video game console industry (where platforms vie for the hottest new games and all apps must be approved by the platform manufacturer). There are plenty of neat phones like the iPhone; there’s no need to kill competition by banning the business model that made the iPhone possible.

The only situations in which the government must regulate are those in which there is clear anticompetitive behavior and/or market failure. This is the case in the so-called “special access” market, where price gouging threatens to extinguish competition. (In fact, if something is not done, we are likely to see a cellular duopoly in our country — which currently has more competitive cellular options than any other.)

In short, we must save regulation as a took to be used only when appropriate.