The FCC proposed $44 million in fines against three Lifeline providers, an agency news release said Wednesday. That brings the total amount of proposed Lifeline fines to $90 million over the past three months. Notices of apparent liability were issued against three companies “that appear to have requested and/or received Lifeline support payments for individual customers who appeared on the companies’ Lifeline subscriber lists more than once,” the release said. Telrite Corp. was fined $22 million, Global Connection more than $11 million (http://bit.ly/J7g2DJ) and Cintex Wireless more than $9 million (http://bit.ly/J7g2DJ). “The carriers knew or should have known, based on their own internal data, that they were not entitled to support for these duplicates under Lifeline program rules,” the agency release said. Telright, a Georgia eligible telecom carrier that does business in nine states, was found by the Universal Service Administrative Co. (USAC) to have improperly sought Lifeline support reimbursement from more than 4,000 “individual intra-company duplicate lines,” said the NAL (http://bit.ly/1fkR8Mu). USAC found that Global, a Georgia ETC servicing 10 states, was seeking reimbursement for more than 2,000 duplicate lines. USAC found Cintex, a Maryland ETC in four states, was seeking reimbursement for more than 1,800 duplicate lines.

A former House Commerce Committee chairman slammed the idea of restricting incentive auction bids. “Avoid restricting the number of potential bidders,” which would hurt the revenue the auction yields, said House Commerce member Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., at a Capitol Hill briefing Wednesday hosted by Third Way. Some have argued the FCC should limit AT&T and Verizon Wireless participation in the auction. Mobile Future Chairman Jonathan Spalter and Compass Lexecon Senior Managing Director Jonathan Orszag also backed an open auction. “Keep it simple, keep the restrictions off,” Spalter said. Severe restrictions would cause up to $27 billion in lost revenue and “mild” restrictions $7 billion to $13 billion, said Orszag, who has co-written a paper on behalf of AT&T arguing against bidding restrictions. He said “fewer stronger networks” may be better for consumers than a multitude of lower quality networks. “They're saying we should have lower quality and more networks -- that’s the argument,” Orszag said of proponents for limits. Spalter said if an open auction fails in some fashion and does cause “market harms” or problems with competition, the FCC has “a deep basket of tools” to resolve the problems.

Nearly half of all calls that 911 emergency centers in Oregon received from wireless phones in June didn’t include accurate location information, said the Find Me 911 Coalition in a news release Tuesday (http://bit.ly/18UTCSH). Calls lacking the information has increased from 36.5 percent of all wireless calls in October 2010 to 45.8 percent in June 2013 based on data released by the FCC, said the coalition. Despite FCC regulations requiring accurate location data to be provided for all calls, 46,660 of 101,787 wireless calls received in June lacked accurate Phase II location information, said the coalition. The Oregon data release has similar findings to information on Phase II calls in California, Texas, Pennsylvania, Utah and North Carolina, and it “points to a growing national problem” in 911 location accuracy, it said. The FCC is scheduled to consider an order on steps to improve the reliability and resiliency of 911 networks nationwide at its Thursday meeting. Carriers have been locked in a fight with the coalition, which they say is funded by technology provider TruePosition and has been spreading bad information to states (CD Nov 19 p1). AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile and the Northwest Wireless Association did not immediately comment.

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman sent letters to five wireless carriers asking for information on their decision to prohibit Samsung from pre-loading an opt-out “kill switch” application on approved smartphones, he said in a news release Wednesday (http://bit.ly/1bvQMNS). The kill switch feature would enable “legitimate” smartphone users to “brick” their stolen phones remotely and “render them permanently inoperable when they fall into the wrong hands,” said Schneiderman. In the letters to the CEOs of AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, U.S. Cellular and Verizon, Schneiderman wrote that the industry’s parallel rejection of Samsung’s kill switch proposal is problematic (http://bit.ly/IPS1Rh). “First, smartphone robbery is rampant nationwide, posing a serious risk to the safety and well-being of your customers,” said Schneiderman. Since carriers have not accepted a Samsung proposal or offered an alternative kill-switch technology, Schneiderman said he finds this “troubling.” In his letters, Schneiderman asks each company for information on: Whether they have communicated or entered into an agreement with phone insurer Asurion, CTIA or any competing wireless carrier on the Samsung proposal or other kill-switch technologies; the nature and extent of such agreements or communications; and each company’s business rationale for rejecting the Samsung proposal while approving phones featuring Apple’s Activation Lock. Schneiderman is asking all five companies to respond by Dec. 31. CTIA General Counsel Michael Altschul said Schneiderman’s allegations are inaccurate. “Any assertion that CTIA and its member companies have done anything other than move as quickly as possible to work with the FCC, law enforcement officials from major cities, and other policymakers to develop the proactive, multifaceted approach of databases, technology, consumer education, legislation and international partnerships to remove the aftermarket for stolen phones is false,” said Altschul. “We encourage consumers to use currently available apps and features that remotely wipe, track and lock their devices in case they are lost or stolen, and our members are continuing to explore and offer new technologies to address these crimes while not inadvertently creating a ’trap door’ that hackers and cybercriminals could exploit. We also support Senator [Chuck] Schumer’s, [D-N.Y.], legislation that would impose tough penalties on those who steal devices or illegally modify the unique device identifiers since it would help dry up the market for those who traffic in stolen devices."

Samsung licensed the Reference Design Kit (RDK) from RDK Management to accelerate the set-top box and gateway device development cycle, said the companies in a news release Wednesday (http://bit.ly/1d8nIPb). RDK is a pre-integrated software to provide a common framework for powering IP or hybrid set-top box and gateway devices, and is licensed for consumer electronics manufacturers, system-on-a-chip vendors, other software developers, system integrators and TV service providers, they said. The RDK was developed to accelerate the deployment of next-generation video services and to prevent software fragmentation by providing speed-to-market collaboration and standardization, said the companies. RDK Management was formed in a joint venture between Comcast Cable and Time Warner Cable to administer the RDK, they said.

Comcast is adding partners to SEEiT, its platform to connect social conversations and promotion around content to the actual viewership of TV shows, movies and sports, it said in a news release Wednesday (http://bit.ly/1bw0ujx). The new partners expected to join include ABC Entertainment Group, A+E Networks Group, AMC Networks, Cablevision’s Optimum TV, Charter Communications, Crown Media, Discovery Communications, Fox Networks Group and Time Warner Cable. ABC, Fox, FX Networks, A&E, Discovery, Fox Sports 1, Hallmark Channel, National Geographic Channel and WE tv are among networks expected to join NBC, NBC Sports Network, CNBC, MSNBC, USA, SyFy, Bravo, Oxygen, E!, Esquire Network and Golf Channel in promoting content via SEEiT. SEEiT will enable subscribers of Time Warner Cable, Charter and Cablevision’s Optimum to tune into live TV or start an on-demand show on their set-top box, watch shows online or on their mobile devices through participating partners and set their DVRs, said Comcast. SEEiT is developed and operated by Comcast and launched by Twitter, said Comcast. It started as a “preview” on Nov. 22 on SyFy shows Haven and Naked Vegas, and it has now expanded to additional NBCUniversal programs, said Comcast.

AT&T’s backing of “fair” rules in the upcoming incentive auction “points to the likelihood that the FCC will adopt some new limits on carriers, but a fight remains over the specifics,” said Stifel Nicolaus analyst Christopher King Wednesday in an email to investors. AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson said Tuesday that he was in favor of some limits on bidding in the incentive auction, but only if they applied to all parties (CD Dec 11 p6). Joan Marsh, AT&T vice president-regulatory affairs, said at a Senate Commerce Committee hearing Tuesday that the carrier would prefer an unrestricted auction but that any rules should apply equally to all parties (CD Dec 11 p3). “We suspect the FCC might prohibit any carrier from buying more than one-quarter or one-third of the converted broadcast spectrum, perhaps with wrinkles,” King wrote. “A 10x2 pair would fit within either limit if the FCC is able to sell off 84 MHz of licensed spectrum, but would only fit within the one-third limit if it sells off just 60 [megahertz]. … We would expect Sprint, T-Mobile, and others to continue arguing for a broader limit on spectrum below 1 GHz that restricts AT&T and Verizon more than others because the Bells already have about 80 percent of that spectrum."

The FCC has “broad authority” to address public interest harms and resolve disputes that stem from the current retransmission consent regime, said a joint ex parte letter from Public Knowledge, the New America Foundation, American Cable Association, Time Warner Cable, DirecTV, Charter Communications and Dish Network. Statutory language from Congress on the commission’s oversight of retrans “not only permits the Commission to adopt rules designed to ameliorate the demonstrated consumer harms associated with unreasonable fee demands and programming blackouts, but affirmatively requires the Commission to do so,” said the letter. Broadcaster tactics in retrans negotiations, including sharing arrangements, “cannot be squared with the outcomes that would occur in a genuinely competitive marketplace,” said the letter. Along with retrans rules, the commission’s authority over such negotiations also comes from the FCC’s responsibility to ensure that broadcast licensees act to further the public interest, the letter said. This means the commission is empowered to adopt new rules for retrans negotiations and obligated to “protect consumers from broadcasters’ unreasonable fee demands, tying practices, and programming blackouts,” said the filing. It said the commission also has the authority “to require interim carriage pending the resolution of a retransmission consent dispute,” and should “promptly exercise that authority to protect consumers and restore congressional intent."

The federal government’s decision to redact information in its response to a petition from technology companies seeking to disclose more information about U.S. surveillance requests “is within the discretion of the executive branch, and in any event does not interfere with the legal arguments the companies can offer,” it responded to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (http://1.usa.gov/J2WikO). The response to FISC released Monday and dated Friday is the most recent move in the months-long attempt by five tech and social media giants -- led by Google and Microsoft -- to argue the First Amendment gives them the right to disclose the specific number and type of government surveillance requests they receive as long as they don’t disclose the content or surveillance target (CD Oct 3 p5). The federal government released a response in October urging FISC to deny the tech companies’ request. The companies responded in November, asking for more transparency in the government’s response, saying the redacted portions obfuscated the government’s legal rationale behind its stance and violated the First Amendment (CD Nov 14 p19). “None of the legal arguments in the government’s public brief have been redacted,” said the government’s most recent response. “The classified information is irrelevant to the companies’ argument about the scope of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act’s nondisclosure provisions.” The tech companies have until Dec. 20 to respond.

Data stored in cloud services need stronger protection against government surveillance, the European Parliament said in a nonbinding resolution approved Tuesday. The adopted text wasn’t available at our deadline. The resolution stressed that EU rules apply to all cloud computing services operating in the EU, even if a client in a third country directs otherwise, Parliament said in a news release. Lawmakers acknowledged that the cloud opens opportunities for new jobs, lower costs and less red tape, but said the EU needs safeguards to counteract foreign laws that might lead to massive, illegal transfers of their data, it said. Members asked the European Commission to ensure that consumers get better information about cloud services, saying that users of services that fall under non-EU law should be given “clear and distinguishable warnings” that foreign intelligence agencies may survey their personal data. Parliament members (MEPs) also asked the EC to make sure that consumer devices don’t make use of cloud services by default and aren’t restricted to specific cloud providers. They also want a minimum level of consumer rights relating to privacy, data storage in non-EU countries and liability for data losses. While the market should be open to all law-abiding providers, the more server farms there are in Europe, the better for European companies and the more sovereignty the EU has over those servers, MEPs said. BSA/The Software Alliance said it has “mixed views” on the resolution. While lawmakers recognized the significant potential of cloud computing, they approved “worrying and contradictory proposals that could undermine Europe’s participation in the global cloud network,” it said. Saddling European services with market-specific rules relating to procurement, standards and content stored in the cloud must be considered in a global context or they'll limit the economies of scale cloud computing is designed to deliver, said Government Relations Director-Europe, Middle East and Africa Thomas Boué.