The FCC will vote next month on a proposal to speed up FCC authorization of new tech.

Acting FCC chair Jessica Rosenworcel said Wednesday (May 26) that the FCC will vote at its June 17 open meeting on an item that allows "conditional" sales and feature marketing--but not delivery--of technology to consumers before it has gotten FCC equipment authorization. It would also permit limited importation of technology, including 5G technology, in preparation for sale.

"The FCC’s equipment authorization program helps to make sure that the latest smartphones, laptops, and other gadgets work as intended and don’t create harmful interference," said Rosenworcel, but said that to make sure the FCC keeps pace with innovation, the rules will allow manufacturers "to gauge consumer interest for new products and take advantage of new mechanisms for marketing devices, like crowdfunding, while still ensuring that the important goals of the equipment authorization system and security are not undermined."

The FCC has already voted unanimously to propose the changes, and the fact that Rosenworcel has teed up a vote in a 2-2 politically tied commission suggests the vote on the final order will be the same.

Big Tech bigwigs Amazon and Google have been pushing the early authorization of devices, which the Consumer Technology Association petitioned the FCC to adopt.

Google and Amazon cited the pandemic as providing a couple of reasons for speeding the rule change. 

One is that consumer access to innovative products, whether for school, telehealth, remote work, news, entertainment or basic interaction is more important than ever given the isolation of COVID-19. Then there is the argument that new tech will be a catalyst to post-COVID economic recovery. It also points out that pre-ordering online has become commonplace, so consumers would be comfortable with the process.

Not surprisingly, CTA was pleased with the upcoming vote.

“We are thrilled the FCC is voting on CTA’s request to revise its rules to prioritize marketing and importing essential consumer technologies," said CTA president Gary Shapiro. “The old rules from the 1970s are putting Americans at a global disadvantage in how soon they can get the newest devices they want. The old rules that restrict importing and selling tech devices directly to consumers no longer make sense. The importance of and demand for 5G and other next-generation devices became even clearer during the pandemic as Americans shifted to working, learning and receiving medical care online.  

“CTA members are now racing to meet the consumer demand for connected devices. We will see more of these innovative technologies at CES 2022 in Las Vegas the first week in January. If the old rules are revised, companies can get these essential products into consumers hands faster and speed up 5G deployment.”

Despite having announced adoption of managed WiFi technology, Charter Communications is, increasingly, an outlier among U.S. telecoms for having yet to launch an actual service.

The eighth-largest cable company in the U.S., Atlantic Broadband, recently became the latest MSO to launch managed WiFi based on a cloud-based technology developed by Plume, OpenSync. 

Atlantic Broadband, which reported 492,212 broadband customers as of the end of September, is now offering these subscribers “WiFi Your Way.” Powered by Plume’s HomePass technology, the new service includes AI-driven optimization features, which adapt router settings to customer usage patterns to deliver better speed and performance over time. There are control and personalization features that let parents shut down and enable their kids’ devices from their iOS and Android smartphones. 

ALSO READ: WiFi Gets Its Biggest Upgrade in Decades

There are also online security features, as well as home security enablements, such as motion detection. 

The Atlantic Broadband announcement comes about 14 months after Charter, the No. 2 U.S. cable operator, said its Spectrum operations would deploy managed WiFi based on Plume’s core technology, the open-sourced, cloud-based software OpenSync. 

But Charter still hasn’t deployed the managed WiFi service, which it calls “Advanced In-Home WiFi,” to key markets such as Los Angeles. 

For its part, Charter just published a self-produced Q&A with its top technology executive, Stephanie Mitchko-Beale, who said the company is “in the process of launching” Advanced In-Home WiFi “throughout our footprint.”

The service, she said, will enable Charter’s more than 28.6 million home internet customers “control over their security and privacy by letting them see every device that’s connected to their network and how it’s being used.

“Throughout the year, we plan to make Advanced WiFi available in more markets, and we continue to expand the availability to our own Spectrum-branded WiFi Pods to enable customers to maximize network connectivity throughout their home,” Mitchko-Beale added. 

ALSO READ: Netgear Debuts Pricey WiFi 6E Router

Asked which Charter markets have seen Advanced In-Home WiFi deployments,
a representative for the MSO referred Multichannel News to the Mitchko-Beale statement. 

Notably, top U.S. cable operator Comcast, an early investor in Plume, has been offering managed WiFi services based on OpenSync to 30 million-plus broadband customers for several years. 

For now, the limited penetration of managed WiFi doesn’t appear to be curtailing Charter’s overall proliferation of broadband services, with the cable operator adding 537,000 high-speed internet customers in the third quarter.  

South Korea’s LG Electronics — the No. 4 Seller of smart TVs to the U.S., controlling around 12% of the market — has made a major upgrade to the operating system controlling those sets. 

Version 6.0 of webOS will power LG’s OLED, QNED Mini LED, NanoCell and UHD smart TVs. The software will be paired with an upgrade to the remote control packaged with these sets, dubbed Magic Remote. 

The previous iteration of webOS featured a simple shortcuts bar with apps, HDMI destinations and other key data on the bottom of the screen, letting users see the programming as they worked the OS. Users could select, say, a specific streaming app from the shortcuts bar, and another row of data would appear, highlighting what was on that service.

ALSO READ: CW Launches App on Vizio SmartCast Platform

For webOS 6.0, the software now has a full, dedicated home screen, like most other OS platforms — a homogenization notably lamented by tech reviewers, who preferred the simplicity of the previous iteration. 

Programming recommendations sit above a horizontal row of favorite apps. Other horizontally configured lists, such as live TV picks, unfurl below the apps list. 

"The new home screen provides faster access to the most frequently used apps and streamlines content discovery with the ability to receive recommendations based on the user’s preferences and viewing history,” LG said in its announcement. 

WebOS 6.0 will support voice commands for both Google Assistant and Amazon Alexa. 

The new Magic Remote, meanwhile, includes dedicated buttons for Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, Disney Plus and LG’s curated channel. 

“The latest version of our user-friendly open TV platform webOS 6.0 represents the most significant update since we first introduced webOS in 2014,” said Park Hyoung-sei, president of LG Home Entertainment, in a statement. “With the new edition of webOS, LG is demonstrating its commitment of offering services, products and technologies that respond to the needs and wants of our valued customers.” — DF

Tech association ITI is urging that all votes be counted in the hotly contested 2020 election.

"Tuesday’s election continues a two-century-old tradition of the United States’ democratic process allowing Americans to choose their leaders," said ITI President Jason Oxman.

President Trump's campaign has tried to stop vote-counting in some states while Biden has urged patience and for all votes to be counted.

"The historic voter turnout reflects the widespread civic engagement efforts that took place across the country, encouraging millions of Americans to exercise their right to vote," he said. "As the votes are counted, we continue to urge all Americans to support America’s long-standing and important tradition of peaceful and fair elections."

ITI said it was ready to work with whichever Administration emerges on tech issues, but it has been critical of President Trump over the President's pushback on some diversity training, its restrictions on immigration, his executive order on regulating social media, and tarriffs.

Saying the move was to ensure the U.S. is a player in international tech standards, the Department of Commerce said U.S. companies can disclose technologies--5G, autonomous vehicles, artificial intelligence--to Huawei even though it has declared that company to be a national security threat. 

That disclosure has to be in the setting of a standard-setting body and can only be technology that could have been disclosed to the Chinese telecom before it was put on the Entity List. That is the list of companies that U.S. firms are not supposed to supply with U.S. tech. 

"This action is meant to ensure Huawei’s placement on the Entity List in May 2019 does not prevent American companies from contributing to important standards-developing activities." That is because Huawei has "pervasive participation in standards-development organizations," said Commerce. 

Specifically, Commerce is amending the Huawei entity listing that tech can be disclosed "for the purpose of standards development in a standards-development body without need for an export license." 

Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross said the change will ensure "the U.S. industry’s ability to more fully contribute to standards-development activities in the telecommunications sector," given that "[i]nternational standards serve as the critical building blocks for technological development by enabling functionality, interoperability, and safety. U.S. participation and leadership in standard-setting influences the future of 5G, autonomous vehicles, artificial intelligence, and other cutting-edge technologies. 

“The United States will not cede leadership in global innovation. This action recognizes the importance of harnessing American ingenuity to advance and protect our economic and national security,” said U.S. Department of Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross. “The Department is committed to protecting U.S. national security and foreign policy interests by encouraging U.S. industry to fully engage and advocate for U.S. technologies to become international standards.” 

“We are encouraged by the U.S. Department of Commerce’s plans to issue a regulation that clarifies U.S. companies’ ability to participate in international standards development activities,” said Naomi Wilson, senior director of policy, Asia, for tech policy group ITI. “Confusion stemming from the May 2019 entity list update had inadvertently sidelined U.S. companies from some technical standards conversations, putting them at a strategic disadvantage. We hope this measure will provide much-needed clarification and allow companies to once again compete and lead in these foundational activities that help enable the rollout of advanced technologies, such as 5G and AI, across markets. We look forward to reviewing the rule once posted and working with the administration on implementation.”

The FCC has told a federal appeals court that Huawei is wrong on all counts in its challenge to the commission's decision to exclude suspect tech in general from its Universal Service Fund subsidies and, tentatively, Huawei in particular. 

Even if the FCC had not moved to exclude technology deemed a national security threat from the USF dollars, the Congress seconded that with legislation that required it. 

The FCC filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Huawei's appeal of the FCC decision, saying the court can make its decision based on those briefs but that it is ready to go to court for oral argument if it has to. It said the Huawei petition should be denied. 

And while the FCC lays out its argument against Huawei's position, it said the court doesn't even have jurisdiction over the Huawei petition because that petition is not "ripe," in part because the decision to exclude Huawei--and ZTE--tech from the USF funds is tentative, so not a final FCC action, so not ripe for a challenge.  

The FCC voted unanimously not to allow USF fund money to go to carriers using tech from companies that threaten the integrity of networks or supply chains, then tentatively concluded that included Chinese telecoms Huawei and ZTE. The commission told the court that it reasonably concluded that networks with security vulnerabilities that could allow for foreign surveillance "were not 'quality' networks capable of furthering the goal of universal service." 

As to Huawei's assertion that the FCC does not have the authority to make national security judgments, the FCC said they are meritless given its congressionally delegated expertise in evaluating supply chains and networks, including for national security issues.  

While Huawei said the national security call has to be made by the President, the FCC said that separation of powers is demonstrably false, pointing out that part of the FCC's charter was national defense and promoting safety of life and property. 

As to Huawei's challenge to its designation as suspect tech in need of exclusion, the FCC said that was premature since it has not made a final designation (though it will almost certainly be to exclude it). 

"Carriers may still use USF funding for Huawei products or services unless and until the Commission makes a final designation decision—at which point, Huawei can seek judicial review," said the FCC, but added: "In any event, the Commission considered ample evidence that Huawei posed a potential threat to America’s communications networks, including information it received from members of Congress and Executive agencies with national security expertise." 

Tech companies and trade associations--more than 30 of them--have issued recommendations to the G20 governments as they meet to talk about digital tech and economic growth. 

The recommendations are focused on COVID-19 response, the free flow of data, universal broadband and more. 

"Together with industry, the G20 should continue to encourage the open markets and accelerated technology adoption that will drive groundbreaking innovations and creative solutions, including those that directly contribute to the economic and public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic," the groups said. 

One of the key recommendations is strengthening broadband infrastructure, one of the big takeaways from the stay-at-home pandemic, where work, healthcare and education have been conducted remotely. That includes both ensuring networks are resilient, as well as "the connectivity required to enable benefits of technology to reach all citizens..."  

Others include facilitating cross-border data flows and "maintain" strong privacy protections (some critics of Big Tech argue the verb should be "institute"). 

Signing on to the letter were: Information Technology Industry Council (ITI); ACT | The App Association; Asia Internet Coalition (AIC); Australian Information Industry Association (AIIA); Australian Services Roundtable (ASR); Brazilian Association of Information Technology and Communication Technology Companies (BRASSCOM); Canadian Chamber of Commerce; Coalition of Services Industries (CSI); Communications and Information Network Association of Japan (CIAJ); Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA); Computing Technology Industry Association (CompTIA); DIGITALEUROPE; Engine; European Data Centre Associations (EUDCA); Fiber Broadband Association; Fiber Optic Sensing Association; Information Technology and Communications Chamber of Argentina (CICOMRA); Internet Association (IA); Internet Infrastructure Coalition; Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE); Japan Business Machine and Information System Industries Association (JBMIA); Japan Electronics and Information Technology Industries Association (JEITA); Japan Information Technology Services Industry Association (JISA); Japan Machinery Center for Trade and Investment (JMC); Mexican Chamber of Electronics, Telecommunications and Information Technologies (CANIETI); National Foreign Trade Council (NFTC); TECHNATION; techUK; Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA); United States-India Strategic Partnership Forum (USISPF); United States Chamber of Commerce; and United States Council for International Business (USCIB).

As the European Union contemplates the best way to start reopening businesses, tech advocate ITI has some recommendations on how to harmonize that process to protect public health and worker safety. 

That guidance was provided in letters to European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen and European Council president Charles Michel. 

Related: COVID-19 Crisis Hits TV Industry

ITI said the EU will need to coordinate the process to avoid a patchwork of policies and with a focus on "assessing readiness; health monitoring; transmission mitigation techniques; and employee support." 

It also said that since the pandemic is a moving target, the "consistent, scientific, and data-driven recommendations" must be reviewed and updated to meet the moment. 

While it is focused on the tech sector--its members include internet companies, hardware and networking equipment manufacturers, and software developers--ITI said the following guidelines apply to businesses large and small across all industries: 

1. "Assessing readiness: A checklist of considerations prior to reopening would enhance employee and consumer confidence while mitigating transmission of the virus.  

2. "COVID-19 screening: General guidance on reliable screening methods would encourage the widest possible deployment of employer-based screening. 

3. "COVID-19 testing: Flexible testing guidance would give companies the ability to adopt testing measures based on the safety needs of their workforce. 

4. "Physical changes to office environments to enable social distancing: Space planning guidance, addressing for example how to reconfigure cubical or open workspace environments, and mitigate transmission risk in shared spaces. 

5. "Alternative mitigation strategies where social distancing is infeasible: Alternative mitigation guidance where workspaces do not lend themselves to retrofitting or job functions prevent social distancing.  

6. "Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) or face coverings: Guidance on who is responsible for providing PPE or face coverings, and whether an employer may require employees to provide their own face coverings in an environment that does not require PPE. 

7. "High risk or vulnerable employees: Guidance on risk profiling and related privacy obligations; describe what responsibilities, accommodations, or protocols particularly susceptible employees trigger; and how to encourage these individuals to appropriately protect themselves. 

8. "Sanitation and disinfectant protocols: Guidance on sanitation and disinfectant protocols as offices reopen and after a confirmed COVID-19 exposure occurs. 

9. "In-person gathering restrictions: Guidance on what restrictions on in-person gatherings will persist will benefit employers, employees, and individuals alike. 

10. "Contact tracing: A clear set of protocols for data processing among private entities and local public health agencies – as well as across borders- to enable interoperability and data sharing among bordering Member States and closely situated localities.  

11. "Compliance: Guidance on how to best encourage and ensure compliance with public-health driven guidelines by employees and customers. 

12. "Mobility guidance: Clarity with regards to intra-EU mobility prospects, along the lines of the recent and very helpful European Commission Guidelines concerning the exercise of the free movement of workers during COVID-19 outbreak. 

13. "Balancing health and safety and COVID-19 related family circumstances: Guidance on how to balance workplace re-openings, health and safety concerns, and COVID-19 family circumstances." 

Attorney General Bill Barr made Apple's refusal to build government back-doors into information on its iPhone part of the lead of his announcement on the December shooting at the Pensacola Naval Air Station.

Barr said Apple's practice of warrantless encryption is "dangerous" and "unacceptable."

Related: Barr Says Warrant-Proof Encryption Aids Sexual Exploitation

Mohammed Saeed Alshamrani shot and killed three U.S. sailors. Barr and Justice had sought Apple's help in unlocking the phones, but Apple had designed the phones so that only the user could gain access, something Justice is not happy with.

Related: CCIA 'Disayed' at Barr Encryption Stand

Barr announced that there was a definite link between Alshamrani and Al Quaeda, which had been confirmed because after four months the FBI had unlocked his phones, but added a "no thanks to Apple" high in his announcement. DOJ had a warrant, but it took DOJ four months to crack the encryption Apple had built in to protect user privacy.

"Four months ago, I announced that this shooting was an act of terrorism," Barr said. "I also publicly asked Apple to help us access the locked contents of the two iPhones belonging to the deceased terrorist Mohammed Saeed Alshamrani. It was clear at that time that the phones were likely to contain valuable information. Indeed, Alshamrani attempted to destroy both phones, even going so far as to disengage from the gunfight long enough to fire a bullet into one.

"Within one day of the shootings, the FBI sought and obtained court orders, supported by probable cause, authorizing the FBI to search the contents of both phones as part of its investigation. The problem was that the phones were locked and the FBI did not have the passwords, so they needed help to get in. We asked Apple for assistance and so did the President. Unfortunately, Apple would not help us unlock the phones. Apple had deliberately designed them so that only the user — in this case, the terrorist — could gain access to their contents. "

Barr said that the information secured by the FBI had already proven "invaluable" in protecting Americans, sending the clear message that those lives could have been protected months sooner had Apple built in a back door.

Barr has long argued that law enforcement must have access to secure devices to be able to deter and solve crimes, and that tech has to be part of the solution.

The concern predates Barr or the Trump Administration. FBI Director James Comey expressed similar concerns over warrant-proof encryption. 

Tech companies have come up with a list of recommendations for what will need to be done to safely reopen the economy to avoid both the risk of spreading the pandemic and the risk of a "patchwork" response to the reopening.

The list is a long one and suggests a difficult road ahead, as well as current mixed signals from government agencies.

Global tech association ITI outlined its guidance for reopening the workplace in a letter to Vice President Mike Pence, who is heading up the White House's coronavirus task force. ITI members run the gamut from Nielsen to Qualcomm, Facebook and Amazon to Verizon, Google, HP and Intel.

Related: COVID-19 Hits Industry

The President has pronounced that the country is moving from a virus response phase to an economic recovery phase.

ITI said there should be clear and consistent guidance and a data-driven approach to that reopening if the public is to feel safe about returning to that reopened economy. What there should not be, it said, is a "patchwork of federal, state, and local policies that will cause needless, time-consuming, and resource-draining confusion that will delay our national economic recovery."

Currently the President has said he is leaving it up to the states to make the decisions about reopening, though encouraging them to so as quickly as possible.

ITI also noted the conflicting guidelines from more than half a dozen federal agencies.

“Many in the technology sector will eventually return to their workplaces," said ITI President Jason Oxman. "When the time comes to safely do so, unified federal guidance will expedite the transition to the next phase." Oxman did not say when ITI thought that time would come.

Here are some of the things ITI said should come before such a coordinated reboot:

"Assessing readiness: Workplace readiness guidance that includes a checklist of considerations for employers to ensure employee and consumer confidence while mitigating transmission of the virus.

"COVID-19 screening: General guidance on which screening methods, techniques, and technologies can be reliably used in particular work environments to detect possible COVID-19 illness would encourage the widest possible deployment of employer-based screening.

"COVID-19 testing: Flexible testing guidance to give employers the ability to adopt testing measures based on the safety needs of their workforce. As testing capacity increases, guidance should encourage widespread testing, including of those who are asymptomatic, and also encourage employer-administered testing.

"Physical changes to office environments to enable social distancing: Space planning guidance, such as how to reconfigure cubical or open workspace environments, and how to appropriately mitigate transmission risk in shared spaces such as elevators, meeting rooms, kitchens, break rooms, cafeterias, locker rooms, and restrooms.

"Alternative mitigation strategies where social distancing is infeasible: Alternative mitigation guidance where workspaces do not lend themselves to retrofitting or job functions prevent social distancing.

"Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) or face coverings: Guidance on who is responsible for providing PPE or face coverings, whether an employer may require employees to provide their own face coverings in an environment that does not require PPE, and whether employers are obligated to verify employee-provided face coverings conform with CDC guidelines.

"High risk or vulnerable employees: Risk profiling guidance to identify high risk or vulnerable employees occur; identify related privacy obligations that arise; describe what responsibilities, accommodations, or protocols particularly susceptible employees trigger; and how to encourage these individuals to appropriately protect themselves.

"Sanitation and disinfectant protocols: Guidance on sanitation and disinfectant protocols after a confirmed COVID-19 exposure occurs.

"In-person gathering restrictions: Clear guidance on ongoing restrictions for in-person gatherings for the benefit of employers, employees, and attendees alike.

"Contact tracing: Federal guidance to encourage all levels of government to coalesce around one set of protocols for the timely collection, processing, and sharing of data among private entities and federal, state, and local public health agencies to enable necessary interoperability and data sharing among bordering states and closely situated localities. Guidance should include what records employers should maintain to support contact tracing efforts; how, when, and with whom those records should be shared; how and when to notify employees of a potential exposure; and how to properly address privacy risks or obligations that arise from this activity.

"Compliance: Guidance on how to best encourage and ensure compliance with public-health driven guidelines by employees and customers.

"Immigration guidance: Guidance that provides immediate but temporary government flexibility regarding immigration status, work authorization, and compliance deadlines where overstays are unavoidable due to COVID-19 travel restrictions.

"Balancing health and safety and COVID-19 related family circumstances: Employee support guidance on how to balance workplace re-openings, health and safety concerns, and COVID-19 family circumstances." 

Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.)  are introducing a bill, the Countering Chinese Attempts at Snooping (C-CAS) Act of 2020, that would further crack down on Chinese telecoms Huawei and ZTE and any other company that the State Department identifies as controlled by the Chinese Communist Policy. 

The bill would prevent federal employees from conducting any official business over platforms "run" by Huawei, ZTE, Tencent, and any other suspect tech. 

The bill requires the Secretary of State to create a list of Chinese tech companies that are determined to enable the Chinese Communist Party to conduct espionage. That is the list of companies whose technology government employees are prevented from using. 

It would also prevent any taxpayer dollars going to fund U.N. contracts with any suspect tech supplier. 

Related: FCC Seeks Input on Excluding Foreign Tech 

The FCC has already moved to prevent government broadband subsidy money going to Huawei, ZTE, and other suspect tech and has moved to revoke the licenses of some Chinese telecom nets linking to U.S. networks, and Congress is excluding them from government contract money. 

"The United Nations' decision to partner with Tencent, a glorified surveillance arm of the Chinese Communist Party, is stupid and dangerous," said Hawley. "Chinese technology companies like Tencent and Huawei actively conspire with the CCP to conduct international surveillance and present an ongoing threat to the United States and our allies. American taxpayer money should not fund UN contracts that benefit the Chinese Communist Party." 

“Preventing U.S. federal employees from conducting official business over platforms controlled by Chinese Communist Party-backed companies is smart policy," said Mike Rogers, chairman of 5G Action and former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. "We must look at, and fully appreciate, the threat posed by companies like Huawei, ZTE, and Tencent to America’s national and economic security. This legislation is an important step in that direction.”

Tech association ITI said tech startups should not be precluded from the Paycheck Protection Program COVID-19 aid Congress is handing out just because they are funded by larger entities. 

Related: Local Media Seek Billions in COVID-19 Aid

That came in a blog post by Shannon Taylor, ITI VP of government affairs. 

Taylor said the affiliate rules need to be clarified.  

"Startups are small businesses, and they often receive critical seed money or equity investment from larger firms," Taylor wrote. "As a result of the affiliation rules, the headcount of these small businesses is bloated by the headcount of the larger firms, disqualifying them from eligibility for the PPP." 

Related: Complete Coverage of the Coronavirus Pandemic

She said that while venture capital is crucial, it is not an "endless spigot." 

Taylor argued they face the same existential threat from the virus as other small businesses.   

Individual TV stations, radio stations and newspapers have also asked that the affiliation rules not exclude thousands of them just because they are part of a larger media group. 

The Senate Commerce Committee has scheduled a hearing to look into the workforce needs of deploying 5G wireless broadband. 

The hearing will be at 10 a.m. on Jan. 22 and will look at what skills and training will be needed to deploy those next-gen networks and what industry is already doing to anticipate and meet those needs. 

And being a Republican-led committee, the hearing will also look at "regulatory barriers" that could be impeding 5G leadership and closing the digital divide. 

Testifying at the hearing will be FCC commissioner Brendan Carr; Jimmy Miller, president of MillerCo. Inc., and chairman of the National Association of Tower Erectors (NATE); and Lisa Youngers, president of the Fiber Broadband Association. 

Carr has been leading the FCC's effort to streamline 5G buildouts, including scaling towers short and tall to get a feel for the challenge.  

Consumer Technology Association President Gary Shapiro is among those who believe the U.S. needs to win the race to 5G (against China, principally). But for him the race is not about the technology as much as it is about what kind of world that technology creates in the right, or wrong, hands. 

"If China wins everything, then their way of life is the way of life that gets pushed on the world," he said. 

Related: White House Praised for Signaling No Nationalizing of 5G

That came in a speech to the DC5G conference in Washington Tuesday (Nov. 5) co-sponsored by SES Networks and the Department of Homeland Security. 

Shapiro, who is all about innovation, conceded that it has its dark side as well in the wrong hands. A hammer can build a house, he said, or kill someone. 

But his focus is on the good, which is why he says the U.S. needs to win the race to a 5G world where the technology is used to benefit health, agriculture, manufacturing, jobs and the U.S. economy, rather than for surveillance and control, as would likely be the case if China dominates the space. 

He said that while people talk about the internet of things, it is really the internet of censors and connectivity. 

Shapiro said that 5G and the AI it empowers--from self-driving vehicles to robotics--together represent a real competitive economic battle for 5G, and one that is important because "our children's way of life and standard of living, the economy and jobs will all depend on how well we do as a nation in these various technologies." 

Shapiro pointed out that the U.S. and Canada have a different world view. From the U.S. view, some of China's surveillance and control uses of new tech would be unacceptable.  

He said jobs and the economy are "really important," but that the bigger issue is individual liberty. 

He said the competition over technology like 5G is "what kind of world our kids and grandkids will live in. Will it be a world with China and its allies where the individual is not important, where there are none of the things we take for granted, like freedom of religion, freedom to access the internet, freedom to vote for someone in a meaningful way, freedom to marry who you want, freedom of association, freedom to petition the government." 

"5G is part of that battle for supremacy, because if we lose we potentially lose those other battles about who we are as a nation," he said. 

Shapiro said the government needed to remain focused on clearing away regulatory impediments to that 5G goal and declaring 5G to be an important driver of economic and social benefits.  

One of those benefits, he said, was going to be self-driving cars. Shapiro said the country needs to focus on the benefits of self-driving cars rather than saying, "Oh my god, there were two people killed." Well 35,000 people die [in traffic accidents] every year. Yeah, we're going to  have some deaths with self-driving," he said. "They will happen....We'll have some challenges with 5G." 

Tech company success takes more than the best digital product or platform. Instead, it takes figuring out how to navigate complex and differentially coherent global government policies, including a growing use of antitrust law rather than regulations to regulate digital platforms. (Both the U.S. Justice Department and Federal Trade Commission are investigating Big Tech, for example, to see if antitrust laws have failed to rein in anticompetitive conduct). 

That is according to the first qualitative review of global digital regulation from international communications law firm Hogan Lovells, which has subject experts to help with that policy divination. 

The appetite for regulating Big Tech appears to be greatest in the U.S. "[T]here were more U.S. proposals to regulate tech in the first half of 2019 than for any other nation in the world," the survey found. 

Related: Blackburn Says Arrogant Big Tech Must Change Tune

The firm surveyed 16 jurisdictions--China, the EU, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Mexico, the Netherlands, Poland, Russia, South Africa, Spain, the UAE, the UK, and the U.S. It was conducted in the first two quarters of 2019. Hogan Lovells lawyers reviewed " political plans, legislative proposals and proposals of governments, NGOs or other stakeholders to regulate tech companies," then the firm interpreted the results.  

One of the top takeaways was that the largest percentage of the government digital oversight proposals tracked (over a quarter) dealt with antitrust rather than regulation. Number two was "interoperability and standards." 

And one thing arguing for the majority of the proposals meeting the light of day were that 70% originated from the incumbent governments with the political majority's to enact them. 

Related: Senate Drills Down on Potential Serial Innovation Killers

By contrast, less than a quarter of the proposals came from trade groups or companies, suggesting to Hogan Lovells that the tech industry is being "reactive." 

Combating fake news is one growing segment of potential regulation, the survey found. "Seventeen percent of the calls for action monitored by the survey relate to content-specific political proposals," the survey said. "A growing number of jurisdictions have passed, or are in the process of passing, laws aimed at fighting fake news and/or hate speech on the internet." 

Not surprisingly, the survey noted the growing call in the U.S. for breaking up Big Tech, but said in Europe that appears to be the measure of last resort. 

Computer and other consumer tech companies are concerned about proposed new changes to Mexican tax law that they say discriminate against foreign tech firms and is in conflict with "longstanding global principles." 

They expressed those concerns in a letter to U.S. Trade Representaative Robert Lighthizer, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin and U.S. National Economic Council director Larry Kudlow. 

The groups, which include the Consumer Technology Association and Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA), said the officials "should discourage Mexico from pursuing these legislative changes, and work to join ongoing multilateral discussions regarding necessary changes to global tax rules in light of digitization."  

“Mexico remains a critical trading partner of the United States, and the landmark digital trade chapter in the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement will open up opportunities for digital exporters of both markets," said president and CEO Ed Black. "Legislation such as these new tax rules in Mexico will undermine this potential.” 

Sens. Mark Warner (D-Va.) and Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) are looking to take a holistic approach to plug up the security holes in the U.S. tech supply chain. 

They have introduced the Manufacturing, Investment, and Controls Review for Computer Hardware, Intellectual Property and Supply (MICROCHIPS) Act (S. 2316), which would "guard against attempts by the People’s Republic of China and others to undermine U.S. national security by exploiting and penetrating U.S. supply chains."

Related: Trump, Tech Companies Agree Huawei Needs Restrictions

Specifically, the bill:

"Directs the Director of National Intelligence, DOD and other relevant agencies to develop a plan to increase supply chain intelligence within 180 days;

"Establishes a National Supply Chain Security Center within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to collect supply chain threat information and disseminate it to agencies with the authority to intervene; and

"Makes funds available under the Defense Production Act for federal supply chain security enhancements."

In announcing the bill, the senators did not identify ZTE or Huawei by name, but both are Chinese telecom suppliers whose connections to the Chinese government have raised red flags with U.S. national security officials and led Congress to exclude them from government contracts.

Related: Sen. Warner Warns of Using Huawei as Trade Leverage

They did say that "Chinese companies export telecommunication technology equipment, software, hardware and services used in the United States, and hope to export fifth generation technology (5G) to the U.S. that could potentially harm and expose both consumer and U.S. military information."

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) waded into Big Tech big time in a Federal Trade Commission oversight hearing that featured much edge-provider critiques.

Cruz was arguably the most pointed critic during the Senate Consumer Protection Subcommittee hearing Tuesday (Nov. 27), which dealt primarily with online privacy and data protection and what additional authority the FTC needed to protect it. 

During questioning the FTC chair suggested the FTC should not be getting into the issue of censorship of speech by platforms, suggesting perhaps that was an area for the FCC.

Sen. Cruz, a former FTC staffer himself, got assurances that the commission was looking into what he called Google's "deceptive and intrusive collection of location information on Android smart phones, its tracking of in-store purchases and its "deceptive by design" user privacy settings.

Cruz asked if the FTC had investigated those claims and what it had found. 

While he said that he could not talk about the specifics of any non-public investigation, which in itself seemed to signal there was one, FTC chair Joseph Simons said that "if you read about it in the press"—Multichannel News was among those who wrote about those issues—or "if there's a congressional letter that points out a potential problem, we're on it."

That appeared to satisfy Cruz. But he was far from done.

He pointed to an Esquire article about how Facebook and Google are together worth $1.3 trillion dollars, and compared that to the companies often cited for their dominance.

To put that in perspective, he said, "you could merge the world's top five advertising agencies [WPP, Omnicon, Publicis, IPG and Dentsu], with five major media companies [Disney, Time Warner, 21st Century Fox, CBS, Viacom] and still need to add five major communications companies [AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, Charter and Dish]" and still only have 90% of what Google and Facebook are worth combined. 

He asked FTC chair Joseph Simons whether the FTC was concerned about the "massive accumulation of power" by Big Tech and how antitrust law should approach that massive concentration. 

Simons said the FTC was worried about the exercise of market power, not the fact of that power. He cautioned that the fact that they are big does not mean it is a problem unless "they got big by being bad"—through anticompetitive conduct—or remain big through such conduct, that is something the FTC needs to stop.

Democratic commissioner Rohit Chopra suggested there might be some competition issues in that very size. He said that if you talk to investors, many say they won't fund a new startup unless they can see the payday of it eventually being bought by a Google or Facebook. He told Cruz he wasn't sure there could be a competitive market or innovative economy "where investors are putting money only into ideas that they can sell to an existing incumbent. 

Cruz called those "good and important" concerns.

But he was not done. He wanted to talk about the issue of Silicon Valley censoring conservative speech. He said they were using their market power to silence discourse in the public space that they disagreed with—he cited Twitter banning a conservative speaker, apparently a reference to conservative Jesse Kelly (coincidentally, he has since been reinstated, Fox News reported Tuesday. Cruz said there was virtually no transparency about what Twitter, or Google or Facebook, might be doing to censor speech. He asked Simons what the FTC could and should be doing about that. 

Simons signaled it was not clear to him that the FTC should be doing anything in the area of speech. He said what Cruz was talking about was similar to the FCC's "fairness Act"—he meant Fairness Doctrine, under which the FCC enforced balanced speech on the airwaves. 

He said "maybe there is an FCC angle there that is appropriate for either the Congress or the FCC to pursue." Cruz was unlikely to be in favor of that, since Republicans long railed against the doctrine as itself a way to repress conservative speech. Simons said that unless it related to a competition issue, or is unfair or deceptive, "then I don't think we have a roll."

Democrat Chopra again signaled he was thinking more along Cruz's lines. He said that he agreed with Cruz that the public knows very little about how edge providers make those content decisions. While he conceded there were free speech issues that might not be in the FTC's wheelhouse, the FCC has [6B) authority to compel information about business practices and to vote to make some of that info public. 

Chopra said the FTC was in a position to reveal some of that information and that he would think hard about those speech issues. Cruz encouraged him to do so. 

Cruz said the FCC had ample authority to provide transparency if platforms were holding themselves up as neutral public squares, but were not. That, he said, would be false and deceptive, something the FTC can address not through antitrust authority but through its Sec. 5 authority.

Chopra, who clearly has his own issues with Big Tech, pointed out that the FTC's authority also extends to enforcing consent decrees with "several of the largest tech companies on the planet," including Google and Facebook. "We expect that those orders are followed. They are not suggestions."

The tech agenda will be a busy one in 2015, but here’s a boiled-down view of four areas we’ll be keeping close tabs on in the year ahead.

1-Gig Gets Going: While Google Fiber and AT&T’s “GigaPower” rollouts set the stage (and the bar) for residential broadband speeds, expect cable operators to amp up their Gigabit Internet plans in 2015.

Bright House Networks was the first U.S. MSO to announce a targeted residential 1-Gig offering, while Cox Communications jumped in with a pledge to begin market-wide deployments of Gigabit speeds by the end of 2016. Suddenlink Communications, meanwhile, has unleashed a project of its own under the “Operation GigaSpeed” banner.

So what about everyone else? Keep a close eye on Comcast. It’s highly doubtful that Comcast applied for the “True Gig” trademark just to keep the lawyers busy.

Onward, DOCSIS 3.1: When you think of 1-Gig via and at scale, it’s impossible not to include DOCSIS 3.1 in the conversation.

The emerging CableLabs-specified platform is promising to deliver multi- Gigabit speeds (up to 10 Gbps downstream and at least 1 Gbps upstream).

D3.1 products aren’t fully cooked, but they’re in the oven. Last week, CableLabs said six vendors (Cisco Systems and Averna among them) participated in a DOCSIS 3.1 interop that took place in early December. More vendors, including Arris, are expected to join the mix when the next interop gets underway in January.

That work will set the stage for official certification testing (by mid-2015) and the first wave of deployments toward the second half of the year. Big rollouts? Put that on your 2016 calendar.

WiFi: What’s Next? Operators have turned their growing WiFi networks into a retention tool and a nifty out-of-home broadband perk for high value Internet subscribers. Next year, expect MSOs to start to push the needle on how to turn WiFi into a more significant money-maker.

As MSOs emphasize “carrier-grade” WiFi, that will pour the foundation for more advanced wireless services, possibly setting up operators to target the hot mobile market using a so-called “WiFifirst” strategy that would prefer WiFi connection and use cellular as a backup. Cable execs like to downplay the idea when asked, but don’t believe for a minute that using WiFi for a bigger mobile play is not part of the long-term agenda.

4K: Ultra HD, or Another Ultra Dud?

4K/Ultra HD has not hit the consumer mainstream yet, but early indications are that it won’t be the disappointment that 3DTV was. We’ve already seen DirecTV and Comcast dip their toes into the 4K waters with some small offerings. Next year, expect many other pay TV operators to hop on board the 4K train, if only to keep pace with UHD products from over-the-toppers such as Netflix and Amazon.

4K won’t quite become table stakes in 2015, but cable operators will need to at least show that they’re in the game.

When it came to compensation, 2014 was another good year for the cable television industry across various disciplines.

The Cable and Telecommunications Human Resources Association’s (CTHRA) 2014 Annual Compensation Surveys found that the average salary adjustment budget grew 3% across the industry, matching the uptick in 2013.  MSOs increased at a 3% clip, equal to the prior year, while programmer’s added 3.1% to their salary budgets, versus a 2.9% bump the prior year.

However, advances were much greater among those working in technology and digital media. In addition, compensation soared across a number of sales positions.

For their part, executives, especially among MSO leaders, notched sizable incentive grants.

“Rising salaries illustrate the cable industry’s nimble response to changes in the competitive landscape, which includes a fierce battle to attract and retain technology and digital media talent,” said Pamela Williams, CAE, CTHRA’s executive director.

Added Hali Croner, CEO of The Croner Co., which conducted the surveys for CTHRA:  "Cable operators are now competing with more companies for technology talent. The presence of over-the-top companies has upped the game for MSOs seeking to find, recruit and retain top digital talent."

Data for the 2014 survey was gleaned from 65 participating companies -- 16 distributors and 49 programmers – up from 63 in 2013. CTHRA said the participants represented the majority of the industry’s employers, including all 25 of the top national cable channels, all five national broadcast networks, new content providers and seven of the eight largest cable operators, plus DirecTV.

Survey results are industry-specific, providing analysis of pay practices for nearly 150,000 incumbents, including both exempt and non-exempt positions, from technicians to the executive suite.

Read the full press release here.