MPAA/Sony Pictures Realizes That Shutting Down Muni-WiFi Over Single Download Was A Bad Thing

from the back-up dept

Last week, we wrote about the ridiculous situation, whereby the MPAA had an entire muni-WiFi network shut down because one person using that system had downloaded a single film. The story ended up getting a fair amount of press, and it looks like the MPAA and Sony Pictures in particular, quickly realized that this was really, really bad publicity for the company. After the company got bombarded by complaints, Sony Pictures contacted the town and asked them to turn the WiFi back on, while also claiming it could help the town set up tools to block such things in the future. Of course, as Broadband Reports notes in the above link: "Of course if the MPAA and Sony had approached the network owners like human beings in the first place -- instead of engaging in the kind of scorched earth tactics they've employed for several years now -- they probably wouldn't have gotten the bad press to begin with." But, acting like human beings in the first place isn't the sort of thing the industry does well.

36 Comments | Leave a Comment..

MPAA Gets Town To Turn Off Free Muni-WiFi Over Single Unauthorized Movie Download

from the the-internets-must-die dept

Dan alerts us to the news that the free muni-WiFi system used around the Coshocton’s County Courthouse in Northern Ohio was shut down over a complaint by the MPAA over a single unauthorized movie download. Amazingly, rather than admit that perhaps that was going a bit too far in punishing everyone in that town over a single individual's usage, the MPAA couldn't resist the opportunity to complain about the evils of movie piracy again. The MPAA doesn't seem concerned at all about the collateral damage, and just thinks that it's a good opportunity to push ahead with its misguided complaint against file sharing.

53 Comments | Leave a Comment..

BART WiFi -- Is It Different Than Muni WiFi?

from the VoIP-at-80mph dept

BART, the regional train service for the San Francisco Bay Area, announced this week that it was going forward after a pilot project to provide public WiFi access on its train lines under a partnership with WiFi Rail, Inc. BART expects to cover 104 miles of track and 43 stations by 2011. Since BART is government-run, this plan is inevitably discussed in the context of the (mostly) failed muni-WiFi plans we heard so much about from 2004-2007, but the BART plan has some key differences which will help it succeed where blanket WiFi coverage failed.

Here are 10 reasons why it sounds like a good plan; 5 based in technology and 5 based in business:

1. BART intends to cover a manageable, finite area. The space in trains can easily be covered using WiFi as the delivery technology.
2. BART has full control of the delivery area, no lease rights, light posts, or permissions are needed.
3. Although BART uses WiFi as a delivery technology, it really is a fiber network, and Wi-Fi is only used to connect to subscribers the last few yards, because WiFi is so ubiquitous in consumer electronics. The fiber "future-proofs" the network, whereas the Wi-Fi can be relatively cheaply updated to newer standards or protocols if required. Other existing rail solutions tend to use cellular or satellite backhaul, which has nowhere near the capacity of fiber optics, has dead zones, and doesn't work underground. These cellular/WiFi hybrid solutions will find it hard to compete with future cellular direct-to-consumer offers.
4. BART has rights-of-way for the core network all along their rail lines. It can easily install and manage its own backhaul (fiber) as well as the delivery (WiFi) network.
5. The fiber/WiFi hybrid network will work in the tunnels and underground. No other wireless technology will be able to compete, without explicit permission from BART to go into its tunnels.
   
   Now on to the marketing reasons:
   
   
6. It's clear that commuters on a train may have some demand for connectivity. Sure, some prefer to sleep or read, but some will want to work or play online. These people are often captive, seated, and bored - a great target market.
7. Further, the density of bodies on a train makes for a better market than muni WiFi's parks and streets. Population density is like catnip to telecom providers.
8. BART is intelligently offering flexible pricing. Unlike the telcos one rate of $60/month with a two year contract, BART will offer annual, monthly, and daily plans immediately, and there is talk of a 2-hour price, and even a 3 minute, ad-supported freebie. BART seems to be smart about removing the barriers for trial and familiarization. The prices seem a bit high, but the range of choices and the lack of commitment are nice.
9. BART can use the network for its own operations: for train telemetry, for surveillance cameras, security, etc. This amortizes the cost and makes the business case better.
10. BART can use the system to pump real-time content and advertising to screens in stations and in trains. Train displays will show location-sensitive ads and information based on current location, and time of day.

Some of the potential negatives are, as mentioned, the price is still too high. The market will likely push them down, and hopefully, the business can withstand that. But captive audiences may reluctantly pay. The contract with WiFi Rail, Inc. has raised eyebrows in that it has a 20-year duration. That does seem awfully long for a technology deal -- even if it is optical fiber-based. Future-proof tech is one thing, but 20 years! Hopefully BART has escape clauses in the deal if the vendor should disappear or fail to perform sometime in the next two decades. Muni WiFi failed because it tried to make the technology do something it wasn't intended to do. But in this case, appropriate technologies are being used correctly, trials were run, true costs are understood, and hopefully other rail operators will be considering similarly structured solutions worldwide.

Derek Kerton is an expert at the Insight Community. To get insight and analysis from Derek Kerton and other experts on challenges your company faces, click here.

14 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Everything Old Is New Again: With MuniWiFi Troubles, We're Back To Sponsored Hotzones

from the back-and-forth dept

In the last few years, there's been plenty of talk and debate about the trouble many cities have had with offering muni-WiFi. There are a number of reasons why muni-WiFi has been troublesome, starting with technology that really isn't designed for wide-area coverage combined with poorly thought out business models. However, prior to the emphasis on "muni-WiFi" with widespread coverage, there used to be tons of stories about much more limited "Hotzone" offerings covering a a few square blocks, usually around a downtown area. It wasn't uncommon for some of these offerings to involve sponsored startup pages as well. With a narrower coverage area, these hotzones still have had some problems, but the challenges aren't nearly as big as covering an entire city. Still, it's somewhat amusing to see people get excited over the sudden reappearance of hotzones, kicked off by CBS's plan to offer WiFi over a section of midtown Manhattan, sticking access points on CBS buildings, billboards and (in coordination with the MTA) subway signs. Glenn Fleishman points out some of the nuttier statements in the announcement, including calling the offering "pre-WiMax" when it has nothing whatsoever to do with WiMax. The service will involve CBS getting to place ads on the start page, and apparently will offer up some local content, though it's unclear what that will entail. Either way, it's a bit amusing to see people suddenly back to being excited about covering a few square blocks with WiFi after years of badly planned out citywide efforts. And, we might want to wait before getting too excited. After all, five years ago, Verizon announced a similar plan, with access points built into old phone booths around Manhattan. Despite later calling the plan a success, it was shut down.

3 Comments | Leave a Comment..