<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
   <channel>
      <title>TelecomSwitchboard</title>
      <link>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/</link>
      <description>Covering the Telecommunications Industry</description>
      <language>en</language>
      <copyright>Copyright 2008</copyright>
      <lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 May 2008 15:17:04 -0700</lastBuildDate>
      <generator>http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/?v=3.34</generator>
      <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 

            <item>
         <title>Say good bye to your set top box?</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/stb.jpg"><img align="right" width="120" src="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/stb-thumb.jpg" alt="stb.jpg" height="90" /></a>Set top boxes have been a ubiquitous part of TV viewing since the first days of pay cable television.<span>&nbsp; </span>High Definition, DVRs and video on demand have made it common place to have multiple STBs.<span>&nbsp; </span>Most STBs are made by either <a href="http://www.motorola.com/">Motorola</a> or <a href="http://www.motorola.com/">Scientific Atlanta</a>.<span>&nbsp; </span>Those 2 companies provide the set top boxes for virtually every cable company in the country.<span>&nbsp; </span>STB glitches and shortages have been a major problem for pay TV carriers.<span>&nbsp; </span>Well, now some of the biggest cable companies, including Comcast, Cox, Time Warner, and Cablevision, are trying to lose the STB all together.<span>&nbsp; </span><span>&nbsp;</span><a href="http://www.sony.com">Sony</a> has signed a deal with these and other cable companies to establish a standard for STB functionality, including DVR, Interactive Programming Guides, and PPV, to be built right into your TV.<span>&nbsp; </span>Other TV manufactures have been invited to join the agreement as well.</font></p><p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></p> <p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">If this is successful it will be a major boon to the cable companies that now spend billions on STBs and a major blow to Motorola and Scientific Atlanta.</font></p>]]>	</description>
         <link>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/say_good_bye_to_your_set_top_b.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/say_good_bye_to_your_set_top_b.html</guid>
<category>Misc</category><category>cable tv</category><category>sony</category><category>stb</category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2008 15:17:04 -0700</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>FCC wants everyone to get broadband</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/wifizone.jpg"><img align="right" width="123" src="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/wifizone-thumb.jpg" alt="wifizone.jpg" height="105" /></a>The <a href="http://www.fcc.gov">FCC</a> wants more people to have high speed Internet access.<span>&nbsp; </span>The <country-region><place>US</place></country-region> is currently 15<sup>th</sup> out of 30 industrialized nations with respect to percentage of people with broadband Internet access.<span>&nbsp; </span>To help boast that number, the FCC is floating a plan auction off additional airwave spectrum frequencies and require the winner to provide free wireless basic Internet access.<span>&nbsp; </span>It&rsquo;s not clear what company might be interested in offering such a service.<span>&nbsp; </span>Building a national network would be very expensive and while the free service would generate revenue from advertising it&rsquo;s not clear this would be a profitable enterprise.<span>&nbsp; </span>Many cities have tried free wireless Internet schemes, but almost all have failed. Some of the most logical companies to try such an endeavor, particularly, AT&amp;T and <a href="http://www.verizon.com">Verizon</a>, have just bought licenses for next generation wireless services and might not be in the market for additional frequency licenses.</font></p>]]>	</description>
         <link>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/fcc_wants_everyone_to_get_broa.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/fcc_wants_everyone_to_get_broa.html</guid>
<category>Internet</category><category>fcc</category><category>spectrum auction</category><category>wifi</category>
         <pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 15:07:05 -0700</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Allergic to Technology?</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">Years ago, people though there might be some health risk from the first microwave ovens. More recently, there have been many studies about the potential health risks of cell phone use.<span>&nbsp; </span><span>&nbsp;</span>Now, a lawsuit in <state><place>New Mexico</place></state> is claiming that <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wi-Fi">Wi-Fi</a> radio waves are causing allergic reactions in some people, including headaches and chest pains.<span>&nbsp; </span></font></font></p><p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></p> <p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">The lawsuit has been filed under the <a href="http://www.ada.gov/">Americans with Disabilities Act</a>.<span>&nbsp; </span>The complaint targets Wi-Fi in public spaces. The plaintiffs charge that they are sensitive to Wi-Fi electronic radio waves and that under the <city><place>ADA</place></city> they are entitled to live without being exposed to them. <span>&nbsp;</span>Therefore, the presence of Wi-Fi in public spaces constitutes discrimination under the <city><place>ADA. </place></city></font></p><p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"><city><place>&nbsp;</place></city></font></p><p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"><city><place>I guess you can sue for just about anything.&nbsp; Paying my taxes always makes me sneeze.&nbsp; Perhaps, I&#39;ll file and ADA suit agaings the IRS.</place></city></font></p>]]>	</description>
         <link>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/allergic_to_technology.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/allergic_to_technology.html</guid>
<category>Misc</category><category>ada</category><category>wi-fi</category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 21:11:37 -0700</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Cell Phone Fees</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/fees.jpg"><img align="right" width="115" src="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/fees-thumb.jpg" alt="fees.jpg" height="86" /></a>Last week I told you that the <a href="http://www.fcc.gov">FCC</a> was working on a plan to change the way cellular phone carriers charge customers that want to cancel their contracts early.<span>&nbsp; </span>Cell carriers have been charging up to $175 to get out of a contract.<span>&nbsp; </span>Perhaps to keep the FCC from passing any new rules, <a href="http://www.wireless.att.com/cell-phone-service/welcome/index.jsp">AT&amp;T Wireless</a> has changed the way it calculates early termination fees.<span>&nbsp; </span>Now, instead of a $175 flat fee, AT&amp;T Wireless will lower the early termination fee by $5 per month, so if you have 6 months left on a two year contract you would only pay $85. <span>&nbsp;</span>Verizon Wireless already has a similar early termination policy.</font></p>]]>	</description>
         <link>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/cell_phone_fees_1.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/cell_phone_fees_1.html</guid>
<category>Cellular</category><category>att wireless</category><category>cellular</category><category>early termination fees</category><category>fcc</category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 16:47:23 -0700</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Exclusive Cell Phone Contracts Being Challanged.</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/rca.jpg"><img align="right" width="139" src="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/rca-thumb.jpg" alt="rca.jpg" height="114" /></a>Just yesterday I wrote about how well AT&amp;T is doing these days thanks to its exclusive deal with Apple to sell the hugely popular iPhone.<span>&nbsp; </span>Well the members of the <a href="http://www.rca-usa.org/">Rural Cellular Association</a> don&rsquo;t like that very much and have filed a petition with the <a href="http://www.fcc.gov">FCC</a> to ban the practice of exclusive contracts.<span>&nbsp; </span>The RCA claims that exclusive contacts are anti-competitive and discriminatory against rural users.<span>&nbsp; </span>The petition goes on to say that the iPhone isn&rsquo;t available to rural users in 16 states because AT&amp;T doesn&rsquo;t sell service in those areas.<span>&nbsp; </span>While AT&amp;T does offer nationwide roaming, it does not allow subscribers to spend more then 40% of their air minutes roaming.<span>&nbsp; </span>This makes AT&amp;T service, and therefore the iPhone, impossible for many rural residents that are out of AT&amp;T&#39;s direct foot print.</font></p>]]>	</description>
         <link>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/exclusive_cell_phone_contracts.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/exclusive_cell_phone_contracts.html</guid>
<category>Cellular</category><category>apple</category><category>att wireless</category><category>cellular</category><category>fcc</category><category>iphone</category>
         <pubDate>Mon, 26 May 2008 17:52:51 -0700</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>iPhone paying off huge dividends of AT&amp;T</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/iphone2.jpg"><img align="right" width="128" src="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/iphone2-thumb.jpg" alt="iphone2.jpg" height="71" /></a>If you build it; they will come.<span>&nbsp; </span>Build a better mouse trap and the world will beat a path to your door.<span>&nbsp; </span>Clich&eacute;s to be sure, but very true in the technology world.<span>&nbsp; </span><a href="http://www.rim.com">Research in Motion </a>discovered this when they came out with the Blackberry and signed up users in droves.<span>&nbsp; </span>Now <a href="http://www.att.com">AT&amp;T</a> is reaping the benefits of its exclusive deal with Apple to sell the iPhone domestically.<span>&nbsp; </span>In a recent study by <a href="http://rubiconconsulting.com/">Rubicon Consulting</a>, an astounding 47% of iPhone buyers had switched carriers to buy Apple&rsquo;s red hot phone.<span>&nbsp; </span>Additionally, iPhone users spent almost $20 a month more on their monthly service then other cell phone users.<span>&nbsp;</span><span>Taking customers away from competitors has always been difficult in the cell phone industry, but AT&amp;T is showing that if you have the right phone people will switch in huge numbers.</span></font></font></p>]]>	</description>
         <link>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/iphone_paying_off_huge_dividen.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/iphone_paying_off_huge_dividen.html</guid>
<category>Cellular</category><category>apple</category><category>att wireless</category><category>cellular</category><category>iphone</category>
         <pubDate>Sun, 25 May 2008 22:21:08 -0700</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Broadcast TV on your cell phone</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/cell%20tv.jpg"><img align="right" width="126" src="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/cell%20tv-thumb.jpg" alt="cell%20tv.jpg" height="111" /></a>Watching TV on your cell phone has become increasing popular in the past couple of years.<span>&nbsp; </span>Selling video subscription services has also been a revenue growth area for cellular carriers.<span>&nbsp; </span>However, some new cell phones may be able to bypass the cell phone carrier and pick up <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadcast_television_system">broadcast TV </a>signals directly&nbsp;from the airwaves.<span>&nbsp; </span><country-region><place>South Korea</place></country-region>&rsquo;s <a href="http://www.lge.com/">LG</a> has already just released such a cell phone in <country-region><place>Germany</place></country-region>.<span>&nbsp; </span><span>&nbsp;</span>Transmitting video over existing cellular networks has led to bandwidth and network congestion issues and the next generation of cell phone networks is still being built.<span>&nbsp; </span>Putting a digital TV decoder chip into a cell phone would seem to be an easy addition and may someday be as ubiquitous in cell phones as camera.<span>&nbsp; </span>Cellular carriers may balk at being cut out of the revenue stream for cellular TV and broadcast TV has many limitations including being download only and not having any on-demand or personalized advertising capabilities.<span>&nbsp; </span>But in the hyper competitive cell phone market, some carriers, especially smaller carriers, might be willing to forgo the additional revenue of TV subscriptions if it means offering customers something unique in order to get them to switch carriers.</font></p>]]>	</description>
         <link>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/broadcast_tv_on_your_cell_phon.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/broadcast_tv_on_your_cell_phon.html</guid>
<category>Cellular</category><category>broadcast</category><category>cellular</category><category>tv</category>
         <pubDate>Sun, 25 May 2008 19:18:12 -0700</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Cell Phone Fees</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Getting out of a cell phone contract is a lot like breaking up with your spouse, messy and usually expensive.<span>&nbsp; </span>High early termination fees have upset many customers who were unhappy with the service they received from a new cell phone carrier and decided to switch.<span>&nbsp; </span>In response to public outcries and congressional pressure, the <a href="http://www.fcc.gov">FCC</a> is working with cell phone carriers to reduce these fees.</font></p><p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">The FCC is working with the idea that the cellular industry would give consumers the up to 30 days to cancel service penalty free.<span>&nbsp; </span>Some major carriers including <a href="http://www.verizonwireless.com">Verizon Wireless</a> and <a href="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/term%20fee.jpg"><img align="right" width="128" src="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/term%20fee-thumb.jpg" alt="term%20fee.jpg" height="77" /></a>AT&amp;T already offer this, so they really aren&rsquo;t giving up that much.</font></p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">After that termination fees would be prorated depending on the length of the contract remaining, <span>&nbsp;&nbsp;</span>In exchange, the cell phone carriers would be immune for lawsuits in state courts where they are currently involved in several class action lawsuits brought by angry customers. If approved by the FCC, the proposal also would eliminate the authority of states to regulate early termination fees.<p>&nbsp;</p></font></font>]]>	</description>
         <link>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/cell_phone_fees.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/cell_phone_fees.html</guid>
<category>Cellular</category><category>att wireless</category><category>cellular</category><category>fcc</category><category>termination fees</category><category>verizon wireless</category>
         <pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2008 14:54:37 -0700</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Verizon&apos;s new handset strategy</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><span lang="EN"><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/limo.jpg"><img align="right" width="107" src="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/limo-thumb.jpg" alt="limo.jpg" height="107" /></a>Verizon Wireless has made a monumental shift in its&nbsp;cell phone&nbsp;software platform&nbsp;strategy.<span>&nbsp; </span>The carrier has announced that it would make a Linux-based operating system the basis of its future mobile phone software. Surprisingly,<span>&nbsp; </span>that operating system isn&rsquo;t&nbsp;Android, the&nbsp;cell phone OS being championed by Google.</font></font></span></p><span lang="EN"><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">Instead, Verizon is joining the board of the <a href="http://www.limofoundation.org/">LiMo Foundation</a>, a group of carriers, hardware manufactures, and software developers that are building an open-source operating system for cellular phones using the Linux kernal. <p>&nbsp;</p></font></font></span><span lang="EN"><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">Considered an alternative to the Google-led <a href="http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/">Open Handset Alliance</a>, LiMo is taking a similar approach to cell phone software by creating a multi-vendor-supported open source operating systems instead of the kind of proprietary operating system controlled by a single vendor that most cell phones use today.<p>&nbsp;</p></font></font></span><span lang="EN"><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">At this point, most Verizon Wireless phones use <a href="http://brew.qualcomm.com/brew/en/">Qualcomm&rsquo;s BREW </a>operating system.<span>&nbsp; </span></font></font><p>&nbsp;</p></span>]]>	</description>
         <link>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/verizons_new_handset_strategy.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/verizons_new_handset_strategy.html</guid>
<category>Cellular</category><category>android</category><category>cellular</category><category>google</category><category>limo foundation</category><category>operating system</category><category>os</category><category>verizon</category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 23:35:09 -0700</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Netflix Player</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/netflix.jpg"><img align="right" width="124" src="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/netflix-thumb.jpg" alt="netflix.jpg" height="89" /></a>Bringing Internet content off of your computer and onto your TV has been a major focus of many of the Internets top content producers and distributors.<span>&nbsp; </span><a href="http://www.netflix.com">Netflix </a>has just released a major break though in Internet to TV content delivery systems.<span>&nbsp; </span>The <a href="http://www.netflix.com/NetflixReadyDevices">Netflix Player</a> is a small box that hooks up to your TV and your broadband Internet connection and can instantly stream movies from your Netflix subscription right to your TV.<span>&nbsp; </span>The Netflix Player is even Wi-Fi enabled.<span>&nbsp; </span><span>&nbsp;</span>The box is only $99 plus your monthly Netflix subscription.<span>&nbsp; </span>Right now not every title is available via streaming download, but over 10,000 are and the list is getting bigger all the time.<span>&nbsp; </span>There is also a rumor that the Netflix Player may even be upgraded to work with other streaming content sites in the future. </font></p>]]>	</description>
         <link>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/netflix_player.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/netflix_player.html</guid>
<category>Internet TV</category><category>internet</category><category>Netflix</category><category>TV</category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 19:15:31 -0700</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Net Neutrality Bill Introducted</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<span style="color: windowtext"><font color="#000000"><font size="3" face="Book Antiqua"><a href="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/bill.jpg"><img align="right" width="118" src="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/bill-thumb.jpg" alt="bill.jpg" height="110" /></a>Advocates for &ldquo;<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality">net neutrality</a>&rdquo; have found some powerful new allies. <span>&nbsp;</span>The &quot;</font><span class="klink"><span style="color: windowtext"><font size="3"><font face="Book Antiqua"><span style="color: red! important"><font color="#000000">Internet</font> </span><span style="color: red! important"><font color="#000000">Freedom</font></span></font></font></span></span><font size="3" face="Book Antiqua"> and Nondiscrimination Act of 2008,&quot; was introduced by <a href="http://judiciary.house.gov/">House Judiciary Committee</a> chairman John Conyers.<span>&nbsp; </span>The prospective law would require<font color="#000000"> </font></font><span class="klink"><span style="color: windowtext"><font size="3"><font face="Book Antiqua"><font color="#000000"><span style="color: red! important"><font color="#000000">Internet</font> </span><span style="color: red! important"><font color="#000000">service</font> </span></font><span style="color: red! important"><font color="#000000">providers</font></span></font></font></span></span><font size="3" face="Book Antiqua"><font color="#000000"> to interact with each other on a &quot;reasonable and nondiscriminatory basis.&quot; <span>&nbsp;</span>The</font> bill also requires </font><span class="klink"><span style="color: windowtext"><span style="color: red! important"><font size="3" color="#000000" face="Book Antiqua">network</font></span></span></span><font size="3"><font face="Book Antiqua"> operators to ensure that all content, applications, and services are treated equally and that no content is favored over others when consumers access them.<p>&nbsp;</p></font></font></font></span> <p dCzw4="0" g12Ea="2"><font size="3" color="#000000" face="Book Antiqua">&quot;Americans have come to expect the Internet to be open to everyone,&quot; </font><span style="color: windowtext"><font size="3" color="#000000" face="Book Antiqua">said</font></span><font color="#000000"><font size="3" face="Book Antiqua"> Conyers. &quot;The Internet was designed without centralized control, without gatekeepers for content and services. Many of the innovations and products we use every day, such as search engines, </font><span class="klink"><span style="color: windowtext"><font size="3"><font face="Book Antiqua"><span style="color: red! important"><font color="#000000">music</font> </span><span style="color: red! important"><font color="#000000">download</font> </span><span style="color: red! important"><font color="#000000">services</font></span></font></font></span></span><font size="3"><font face="Book Antiqua"> and online video, likely would never have developed in such a restricted environment.&quot;</font></font></font></p>]]>	</description>
         <link>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/net_neutrality_bill_introducte.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/net_neutrality_bill_introducte.html</guid>
<category>Internet</category><category>house of representitives</category><category>internet</category><category>net neutrality</category>
         <pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 21:20:59 -0700</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>iPhone beware</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/thunder.jpg"><img align="right" width="82" src="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/thunder-thumb.jpg" alt="thunder.jpg" height="82" /></a> <font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">There is a rumor that BlackBerry maker <a href="http://www.rim.com/">Research in Motion</a> will be releasing it&rsquo;s first ever touch screen device.<span>&nbsp; </span>The rumored smartphone, named the Thunder, is already being billed as an iPhone killer.<span>&nbsp; </span>The Thunder will not have the typical BlackBerry QWERTY keyboard, but instead just four buttons for send, end, BlackBerry, and back to go along with the touch screen.<span>&nbsp; </span>The phone will only be available from Verizon Wireless in the <country-region><place>US</place></country-region> and if Verizon meets certain sales quotas the Thurder would remain exclusively Verizon&rsquo;s.<span>&nbsp; </span>The Thunder will sport something special &ldquo;under the hood&rdquo;.<span>&nbsp; </span>The phone will be the first to support both CDMA and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GSM">GSM</a> technologies. <span>&nbsp;</span>It will also support all the of the latest cellular data technologies.<p>&nbsp;</p></font></font>]]>	</description>
         <link>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/iphone_beware.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/iphone_beware.html</guid>
<category>Cellular</category><category>BlackBerry</category><category>iphone</category><category>Thunder</category><category>verizon wireless</category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 23:53:51 -0700</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>ISP P2P blocking more common then thought</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/p2pb.jpg"><img align="right" width="118" src="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/p2pb-thumb.jpg" alt="p2pb.jpg" height="95" /></a><a href="http://www.comcast.com">Comcast </a>has told the FCC that it has been partially blocking peer to peer file transfer services during peak network usage periods in order to keep their network running smoothly for all their customers.<span>&nbsp; </span>However, a new study from the <a href="http://www.mpi-sws.mpg.de/index_noflash.php">Max Planck Institute for Software Systems</a> says that Comcast is slowing peer to peer traffic, specifically BitTorrent traffic, &quot;independent of the time of day.&quot;<span>&nbsp; </span>P2P network traffic was being slowed even when there was no network congestion.<span>&nbsp; </span>The new study also says that another cable giant, <a href="http://www.cox.com">Cox Communications</a>, is also blocking peer to peer traffic around the clock.<span>&nbsp; </span>In fact, Cox was causing more consistent disruption to peer to peer traffic.<span>&nbsp; </span></font></font><p>&nbsp;</p>]]>	</description>
         <link>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/isp_p2p_blocking_more_common_t.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/isp_p2p_blocking_more_common_t.html</guid>
<category>Internet</category><category>bittorrent</category><category>comcast</category><category>cox communications</category><category>file sharing</category><category>internet</category><category>p2p</category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 21:46:45 -0700</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Big Brother?</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/bb.jpg"><img align="right" width="102" src="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/bb-thumb.jpg" alt="bb.jpg" height="150" /></a><a href="http://www.charter.com/Visitors/Home.aspx">Charter Communications</a>, the 4<sup>th</sup> largest cable operator, has starting tracking user&rsquo;s web activity in order to push targeted ads to its subscribers.<span>&nbsp; </span>Charter Communications has 2.8 million Internet subscribers.<span>&nbsp; </span>Charter will sell the data it collects to a company called <a href="http://www.nebuad.com/">NebuAd</a> which will then serve up the advertisements.<span>&nbsp; </span></font></font></p><p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></p> <p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">This new policy has raised the ire of privacy advocates.<span>&nbsp; </span>Charter does allow subscribers to opt out of the program, but most privacy advocates would like to see the program as opt-in.</font></p><p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></p> <p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">Charter is going through the effort of notifying its customers of the new tracking program via mail.<span>&nbsp; </span>Charter claims that many customers do not mind having the surfing habits monitored and would prefer to see ads that are more targeted to them rather then the hodge-podge of ads that blanket the Internet now.</font></p>]]>	</description>
         <link>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/big_brother.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/big_brother.html</guid>
<category>Internet</category><category>advertising</category><category>charter communications</category><category>internet</category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 18:42:17 -0700</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Unlimited no more</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/comcast.jpg"><img align="right" width="150" src="http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/uploads/comcast-thumb.jpg" alt="comcast.jpg" height="78" /></a><a href="http://www.comcast.com">Comcast</a>, is considering abandoning it&rsquo;s unlimited broadband Internet plan and setting a 250 GB monthly cap on subscribers&rsquo; </font></font></p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">Comcast spokeswoman, Jennifer Khoury, says that the company is &ldquo;currently evaluating this service and pricing model to ensure we deliver a great online experience to our customers.&rdquo;<p>&nbsp;</p></font></font><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">Comcast hopes that by limiting the bandwidth available to extremely high-volume users, they can keep their network running at optimal speeds for the rest of their customers that are lighter users. 250 GB is still a huge amount of bandwidth.<span>&nbsp; </span>It&rsquo;s hard to see how this could really affect anyone except the most ardent downloader.<span>&nbsp; </span>250 GB is equivalent to 60 high-definition movies or 3,000 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3">MP3</a> albums per month.<span>&nbsp; </span>It&rsquo;s also hard to see how cutting off a few super high volume users is going to improve overall network speed for everyone else.<span>&nbsp; </span>If a few users are capable to causing a bottleneck across an entire service area, it would seem that Comcast has other network issues to deal with besides a few bandwidth hogs.<p>&nbsp;</p></font></font>]]>	</description>
         <link>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/unlimited_no_more.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.telecomswitchboard.com/2008/05/unlimited_no_more.html</guid>
<category>Internet</category><category>bandwidth</category><category>comcast</category><category>download</category><category>internet</category>
         <pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 14:53:17 -0700</pubDate>
      </item>
      
   </channel>
</rss>
