Easily digestible tech news... http://www.techdirt.com/ en-us http://www.techdirt.com/images/td-88x31.gifhttp://www.techdirt.com/ Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:36:32 PST Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130215/03013921992/big-telcos-love-cispa-more-immunity-violating-our-customers-privacy-sign-us-up.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130215/03013921992/big-telcos-love-cispa-more-immunity-violating-our-customers-privacy-sign-us-up.shtml a post-it note given to them by the FBI. The telcos general standpoint has been that they're happy to let the government reach deep into their data -- more or less adding a direct tap on all of us. Congress, however, gift-wrapped them immunity to any lawsuits from all of that kind of stuff. Still, these days, the telcos sure do like not being liable for coughing up their customer's private info to the government, so it should come as little surprise that they're practically shoving each other aside to support CISPA.

Two major trade groups, CTIA and US Telecom, each issued short statements saying that CISPA is a good thing. US Telecom claimed that the bill would make it more efficient to detect, deter and respond to cyberthreats. That would be nice if true, but no one's yet explained how that actually would work in practice. CTIA knows how to play the press, and started its press release by hyping up recent hack attacks. That CISPA likely would have done absolutely nothing to stop those attacks is conveniently ignored.

Meanwhile AT&T and Verizon each offered their own support for the bill, making it clear that protection from liability is the most important thing to them.

The telcos, of course, have nothing to lose and everything to gain from CISPA. It gives them even more freedom from liability in sharing your info, but doesn't present any specific regulatory burdens on them. Of course, shouldn't we be a lot more concerned about the views of the people whose privacy would be violated, than the views of those violating their privacy?

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> of-course-they-like-it http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130215/03013921992 Wed, 13 Oct 2010 12:55:29 PDT Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101013/04080711406/telco-opposition-to-anti-bill-shock-plans-doesn-t-pass-the-laugh-test.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101013/04080711406/telco-opposition-to-anti-bill-shock-plans-doesn-t-pass-the-laugh-test.shtml take on mobile operator "bill shock," that happens when a user, unknowingly, goes way over their allotted time/data and is charged ridiculous overage fees, leading to the ever popular stories of multi-thousand dollar bills. The FCC plans to require mobile operators to at least alert users when they're nearing the limits on their plan. While I'm often skeptical of FCC actions, I'm having trouble seeing what's wrong with this, and the mobile operators protestations are so silly that it's difficult to take them seriously.

Mobile operator trade association CTIA has warned that these sorts of warnings would "cause customer confusion and frustration." Huh? How? And it's already established that it's the crazy huge bills that are causing customer confusion and frustration (and, um, anger). Then there's Verizon Wireless, quoted as saying that "intense competition has led wireless carriers to provide consumers with usage information." Hmm. Information like the phantom charges that Verizon Wireless denied for nearly two years, until it finally 'fessed up and agreed to pay back to the tune of $50 million to $90 million. Honestly, I can't figure out what the pushback is over actually warning customers before they get insane overage charges?

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> more-confusion? http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20101013/04080711406 Fri, 9 Jul 2010 05:30:15 PDT Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100709/02295510146.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100709/02295510146.shtml bill shock when mobile phone bills show up that are in the tens of thousands of dollars. The issue, of course, is that mobile operators do a dreadful job informing their customers of the fees they may be facing. And, while it would be quite easy for the providers to set up some kind of alert (or credit card-style temporary block) if a bill starts to go outside of the "norm," none of the mobile operators seem interested in doing this.

Over in the UK they've put in place laws to prevent such ridiculous bill shock situations, and regulators in the US are considering the same... but the lobbyists for the mobile operators, CTIA, are protesting that such rules are "unnecessary." That would be a lot more convincing if people didn't send in stories about ridiculous bills every few weeks. CTIA also claims that "Members have adopted internal practices and procedures to remediate billing concerns directly with their customers," but in practice those "remediation" practices seem to basically be "wait until the press starts paying attention, and then finally back down."

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> because-it-doesn't-happen? http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100709/02295510146 Wed, 28 Jan 2009 09:33:00 PST Carlo Longino http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090127/1909363549.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090127/1909363549.shtml unless open-access rules are removed from the broadband section of the bill, carriers will be "hesitant to participate". News to Steve: the stimulus bill, and this section, aren't necessarily intended merely to further line the pockets of incumbent mobile operators. While he thinks open-access rules "will deter providers from taking advantage of the grant program," one would have to imagine that if incumbents sat on the sidelines, plenty of new entrants would be more than willing to open their businesses to the government support and use it to craft new mobile broadband networks that would provide some much-needed competition in the space. Furthermore, such open access requirements didn't stop Verizon from shelling out several billion dollars for spectrum licenses last year. It seems that the CTIA loves it some stimulus -- as long as it doesn't stimulate any potential competition for its members.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> hey,-your-policy-goal-chocolate-is-in-my-government-handout-peanut-butter http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090127/1909363549