In 1993, John Gilmore said The net treats censorship as a defect and routes around it.
It's a profound statement.
I have a corollary: License-exempt Broadband Wireless treats telco stupidity as damage and routes around it.
So, I'm not particularly concerned about things like Kevin Werbach's observation of The Telco Mindset.
What Whitacre/SBC... Clearwire... Verizon Wireless do not get... or are too frightened to admit even to themselves is that David Isenberg really is right and in providing Internet access, they are a commodity service - an IP bitpipe distinguished only in where I can access it, how much I pay, how fast/good it is... and that I'm only willing to pay for that access when it suits my needs. If an Internet access service doesn't suit my needs - Whitacre/SBC actively blocking Google because it won't pay a toll to SBC or Clearwire blocking Skype or Verizon Wireless cutting off my BroadbandAccess account because I use the voice capabilities of my various Instant Messenger applications... then I won't pay for their crippled (to me) services, and I now have alternatives.
I've offered the "telco stupidity as damage" observation/corollary to a number of people in a position of influence, and they don't seem to want to get it. One reason I think that is is because the knowledge base regarding License-exempt Broadband Wireless Internet Access (LE BWIA) of those "people in a position of influence"* seems largely limited to "household" Wi-Fi, some interesting hobbyist experiments, the admitted hyping of WiMAX, and the mostly-potential large-scale deployments of Municipal Broadband Wireless systems in major cities like Philadelphia and San Francisco.
But in reality, such a "knowledge base" doesn't even reflect the "tip of the iceberg" of LE BWIA technology and systems that are now possible... and evolving... and actively being deployed.
We have the technology, and sufficient spectrum, to build any conceivable Broadband Infrastructure we want... or need. How much money that any given situation will require is an issue, and it may, at times, be cheaper and better to simply pay what it costs to run fiber. But, it's now the case that building License-exempt Broadband Wireless Internet Access (BWIA) infrastructure is always an option.
But I think there's another reason that "people in a position of influence" don't seem to want to get it about LE BWIA; I think it's because they've spent much of their professional or academic or consulting lives decrying the issues of availability of, pricing of, and restrictions on Broadband Internet Access... mostly relating to Telco/Cableco wireline Broadband Internet Access.
In short, it's simply more comfortable, easier, more academically and politically acceptable for "people in a position of influence" to decry the actions of the Telco/Cableco duopoly rather than accept that LE BWIA is actually an alternative for providing Broadband Internet Access. They don't want to admit (or understand) that LE BWIA is an alternative form of providing Broadband Internet Access that's equally open to community not-for-profit groups to serve the underserved, individual entrepreneurs who see a potential market, government entities to deploy Broadband Internet Access to improve quality of life and accelerate economic development... or even mere neighbors that are tired of individual $65/month Broadband Internet Access bills and inane restrictions on how they use the Broadband Internet Access connections that they paid for.
To be clear, what we're talking about with LE BWIA is a technology... not a "movement". There is now more than enough LE BWIA technology available to enable people to do something about the coming stranglehold on Broadband Internet Access by the telcos and cablecos. "Movements" happen when people to decide to use available technology to accomplish something. We see examples daily what people can do on the Internet... I think we're about to see just how much people can do about getting to the Internet, using License-exempt Broadband Wireless Internet Access... now that the actions and stupidities of the telcos and cablecos are actively motivating them to do so.
* While Kevin Werbach is certainly influential, I wasn't including him in this statement; I count Kevin among those of us who do get it about LE BWIA.
Update 1: Kevin replied in his blog. His plaint - "Who is going to deploy unlicensed wireless broadband in a big way?". Reasonable question... but he's asking it from a "... versus the telcos/cablecos perspective."
Surprisingly (given Kevin's perspective**), in asking that particular question, Kevin misses the entire point about License Exempt Broadband Wireless Internet Access. With License-exempt BWIA, centralization... a single, or big "who" simply isn't required. The answer to Kevin's plaint is: many, many players will deploy License-exempt Broadband Wireless Internet Access... and collectively, it will be "... in a big way". Municipal governments will deploy it. Enterprises will deploy it. Individual Internet Service Providers will deploy it. Public safety agencies will deploy it. Philadelphia deploys it. Dartmouth College deploys it. Odessa Office Equipment deploys it. San Diego County Sherriff's Department deploys it.
Kevin's also got the question entirely backwards. It's not that a question of how are the smaller players going to win broadband customers away from the telcos/cablecos... but rather how are the telcos/cablecos going to keep their existing customers from defecting? At this point it's the telcos/cableco's fight to lose, and all the smaller players will now be steadily inflicting, if not the death of..., then at least the pain of a thousand cuts to the monolithic business model of the telcos/cablecos. If the telcos/cablecos want to avoid those customers from defecting every time they're offered a better deal (and remember, the product in question allows those same customers to easily learn that there are, in fact, a growing number of alternatives to pricey, mediocre Broadband service - DSL Reports now lists Wireless Broadband Service Providers), then they can't get away with clueless behavior for very long.
** Kevin's Supernova conference statement: "The Supernova conference focuses on the decentralization of computing, communications, digital media, and business."
Update 2: There was a good summary of the fallout from Whitacre's remarks in a Washington Post article - SBC Head Ignites Access Debate. Despite the fact that Whitacre claims he was misquoted and misunderstood and his remarks were intended to refer to the "private" portions of their new fiber optic network intended for video ("cable television"), few seem to believe him (including me). His remarks just don't make sense in the changed context - Google is not a major yet player in video, and he specifically stated "Internet", not IP Video. It may be that with his remarks, Whitacre has provided enough fuel for a renewed call for network neutrality. Go Get 'Em, David!
Robert Horvitz of Open Spectrum Foundation / openspectrum.info (a great resource!) summarized the "debate" between Kevin Werbach and I. My response to Horvitz stated in part "... left out what I think is the bigger picture that I addressed - why [Werbach's] "policy wonk" colleagues don't seem to want to get it about License-exempt Broadband Wireless Internet Access being (enough of) an effective alternative to the telcos.".
This article is Copyright © 2005 by Steve Stroh. Excerpts and links are expressly permitted (and encouraged.)
Categories:
- Broadband Wireless Internet Access / Broadband Wireless Access / Wireless Broadband / Wireless Access / Fixed Wireless
- Commentary / Editorial
- Competitive Broadband DSL
- Competitive Broadband Cable Modem
- Competitive Broadband Fiber / FTTH / FTTP
- Municipal Broadband Wireless / MuniWireless / Municipal Wi-Fi
Comments