Our northern neighbors are as embroiled in Internet battles as we are in the United States. Canadians are fighting for high-speed Internet access across the country and to preserve Net Neutrality.

Last week, the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC, their version of the FCC) decided that the ISP Bell Canada did not have to stop it’s “traffic-shaping” practices.

The Canadian Association of Internet Providers, an alliance of small, independent ISPs, had asked the Commission to investigate Bell, saying their network management practices were discriminatory.

Steve Anderson, founder of SaveOurNet.ca, told Free Press that the ruling was bad news for Canada’s open Internet. “The ruling establishes that the dominant ISPs are allowed to throttle the Internet services of even those competing independent ISPs that use their network,” he said. “This means that Canada has less ISP competition, and in some markets, no access to an open, non-discriminatory network.”

SaveOurNet.ca is asking for people to write the CRTC in support of Net Neutrality.

But while the ruling was disappointing, it also put Net Neutrality issues firmly on the CRTC’s radar; it plans to examine ISP traffic management practices and will hold a public hearing on July 6, 2009, in Gatineau, Quebec.

“This [hearing is] something Canadian Net Neutrality advocates have been calling for, and should be seen as a win for the open Internet,” Anderson said. “This hearing is where biggest and most critical Net Neutrality battle will be fought.”

Michael Geist, a University of Ottawa law professor, wrote about the implications of the commission’s decision in his blog:

“Today’s CRTC decision is not the final word on net neutrality in Canada, but rather the first word on it. The Commission itself has opened the door to broader hearings on the issue next year, which may come alongside the new media hearings that also offer the opportunity to raise net neutrality concerns. Moreover, if the Commission comes to the conclusion that these practices are consistent with current Canadian law, there is the likelihood of growing calls from within Parliament to change the law.”

And while activists push for an open Internet, public interest, civic and industry groups in Canada also have launched an initiative called InternetforEveryone.ca to push for a national broadband plan. “For Canada to regain its lost status as a world leader, it needs a national strategy for getting citizens online that is accessible, inclusive, open and innovative,” says the Web site.

The initiative mirrors the U.S. effort at InternetforEveryone.org, an initiative organized by Free Press that is holding its first public meeting about the future of the Internet in Los Angeles on Dec. 6.

There’s been heavy traffic over the Net Neutrality wires since the November 4 Election of Barack Hussein Obama, and it’s not just because the president-elect was so outspoken in support of the principle while on the campaign trail.

There has been a sea change in Washington since then, as the wonks, tech pundits and lobbyists align themselves with new leadership and the likelihood that Net Neutrality could become law soon.

Holding to His Pledge

Within two days of the election Obama’s transition team laid out his science and technology agenda at www.change.gov, prominently highlighting the work that SavetheInternet.com members have prioritized for more than two years now.

According to the agenda, an Obama administration will hold to its campaign promises and “protect the openness of the Internet.”

“A key reason the Internet has been such a success is because it is the most open network in history. It needs to stay that way,” Obama’s agenda states. “Barack Obama strongly supports the principle of network neutrality to preserve the benefits of open competition on the Internet.”

Soon thereafter, former Vice President Al Gore told CurrentTV that he was “all for” Net Neutrality.

“I just think that it’s unacceptable to have the folks that control the pipes to get into anything that smacks of controlling the content, or favoring their content over other content,” Gore said.

Legislation for 2009

And just yesterday, a top staffer for Sen. Byron Dorgan told the media that the senator plans to introduce Net Neutrality legislation in the new Congress.

“We feel that legislation is definitely necessary,” Frannie Wellings, telecom counsel to Dorgan said during a conference in Washington. (Disclosure: Wellings worked at Free Press before joining Dorgan’s staff)

Dorgan is influential as one of the highest-ranking members of the Senate Commerce Committee.

AT&T’s New Tune?

Obama, Gore and Dorgan’s support is no surprise. What’s “mind blowing” according to some in the media, is AT&T’s apparent change of heart.

At the same conference, AT&T’s lead policy VP, James Cicconi, said, “There’s a lot of people who now believe that companies like AT&T are not plotting to overthrow the open Internet concept.”

“It’s against AT&T’s economic interest to block or slow Internet content, because customers demand an open Internet, he added. “Our core asset is our network,” he said. “We get paid for carrying bits.”

This is from the same company whose former CEO called all of us “nuts” for wanting to use his “pipes” without paying a special access fee.

“There has been no larger, stauncher opponent of Net Neutrality,” a surprised Jason Lee Miller writes about AT&T’s recent switch.

“Hasn’t [Cicconi] heard his bosses speak about it?” Miller asks, describing their earlier “desire to discriminate between content providers,” and their willingness to spend tens of millions of dollars on “K” Street firms that “actively lobbied against any such openness.”

That was then. This is now.

Day two of President-Elect Barack Obama’s transition to the White House, and already he came out strong for media reform.

Yesterday he laid out his science and technology agenda, prominently highlighting three core issues that Free Press and our activists work toward everyday. His very first two points marked a commitment to preserving Net Neutrality and promoting diversity in the media.

The plan says an Obama administration will:

• Protect the Openness of the Internet: A key reason the Internet has been such a success is because it is the most open network in history. It needs to stay that way. Barack Obama strongly supports the principle of network neutrality to preserve the benefits of open competition on the Internet.
• Encourage Diversity in Media Ownership: Barack Obama believes that the nation’s rules ensuring diversity of media ownership are critical to the public interest. Unfortunately, over the past several years, the Federal Communications Commission has promoted the concept of consolidation over diversity. As president, Obama will encourage diversity in the ownership of broadcast media, promote the development of new media outlets for expression of diverse viewpoints, and clarify the public interest obligations of broadcasters who occupy the nation’s spectrum.

Obama’s agenda echoes the technology platform that he ran on as a candidate. While we’re encouraged to see that President-elect Obama is honoring pledges made during his candidacy, getting meaningful legal protections for Net Neutrality and against further consolidation is going to take real fighting commitment once he enters the White House.

Another uphill battle, but one Obama seems committed to fighting, is to close the digital divide and ensure that all Americans have access to high-speed Internet.

His administration will:

• Deploy Next-Generation Broadband: Barack Obama believes that America should lead the world in broadband penetration and Internet access. As a country, we have ensured that every American has access to telephone service and electricity, regardless of economic status, and Obama will do likewise for broadband Internet access. Obama and Biden believe we can get true broadband to every community in America through a combination of reform of the Universal Service Fund, better use of the nation’s wireless spectrum, promotion of next-generation facilities, technologies and applications, and new tax and loan incentives.

Just as it isn’t too soon for Obama to make plans for the future of our country’s media, it’s not too soon for the public to inject their voice in the process. His administration is asking for ideas from you, so make sure he hears you loud and clear – we want an open Internet, diversity in media ownership, and widespread broadband access.

What else do we want? That’s up to you. Submit your ideas today.

The Federal Communications Commissions voted late Tuesday to approve the unlicensed use of “white spaces” — empty airwaves between television channels — for high-speed Internet access nationwide.

The landslide vote of the five FCC commissioners (4 to 1) follows years of research, testing and public input that concluded white space frequencies can and should be used to transmit Internet signals to regions of the country that need it most.

While much of the nation is focused on the outcome of another election today, today’s decision will unleash a new wave of economic opportunity and civic engagement for tens of millions of Americans now stuck with no or slow dial-up connections.

In letters to the FCC and Congress, the nation’s leading consumer, media and public interest groups and bloggers voiced their strong support for white spaces. These groups include Free Press, National Organization for Women, Feminist Majority, Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, Consumers Union, Consumer Federation of America, Public Knowledge, Media Access Project, MoveOn.org, U.S. Public Interest Research Group, Common Cause and the Center for Media Justice, among others.

Nearly every market in the United States has empty white spaces; in some communities, more than three-quarters of the television broadcast spectrum sits unused. Today’s FCC vote opens the market to innovators to develop new technologies that will make finding a fast and affordable Internet connection a lot easier for everyone.

The public was the big winner in this landslide vote at the FCC. The five commissioners chose to put politics aside on this Election Day and voted in favor of a policy grounded in sound science. The decision to open white spaces puts consumers first, marking a change in Internet policy we can all believe in.

Over the past eight years, the United States has fallen behind many other world leaders in providing fast, affordable Internet access. Nearly half of American homes are still not connected to broadband.

The phone and cable companies that dominate the broadband market promise more of the same slow speeds and high prices that put us in this mess. Opening white spaces adds much-needed competition and innovation — sparking economic growth at a time when jobs and investment are on a downward spiral.

The mudslinging over white spaces should now end so we can start a new era of innovation that will help close the digital divide and finally provide Internet for everyone.

Just as the sun set on the official comment period on white spaces at the FCC Friday, activists and bloggers injected their voices on the future of the Internet.

Fifty-six bloggers signed a letter asking the FCC to support opening up white spaces for high-speed Internet access. White spaces are one of the country’s best opportunities to close the digital divide and give millions of Americans a fast and affordable Internet connection.

The FCC will vote on white spaces on Nov. 4.

“Few agency decisions carry the potential to help millions of people,” the letter said. “As bloggers of diverse interests, we believe the FCC’s proposed rule would be a huge win for the American public — expanding broadband coverage into regions that need it most, lowering prices for consumers, and triggering lots of economic innovation at a time when jobs and investment are under heavy downward pressure.”

The letter continued, “Moreover, the blogosphere has become the public commons of the interactive age. Bringing more people into the online conversation is a boon to public discourse and civic participation.”

At the same time, more than 13,000 Free Press activists sent a Halloween e-card to the FCC urging the Commission not to be swayed by media lobbyists’ scare-mongering tactics to delay a vote on white spaces. The cards were delivered by Free Press staffers on Friday afternoon.

So while the National Association of Broadcasters spends millions to thwart Internet for everyone, thousands of Americans have acted and want the FCC to vote in the public’s interest.

Brian Beaudet lives in what’s locally called a “holler” in rural Marshall, N.C. “It’s very secluded but my family likes the privacy and the nature that surrounds us,” he says.

A software developer, Beaudet and his family moved to Marshall because he has the luxury of working wherever there’s a “broadband connection to the outer world.” When they purchased their house on 13 wooded acres, they were assured that it was cable-ready.

But it wasn’t long before Beaudet learned that there was no cable connection, and no possibility that the cable company would build one. His family’s dream house was becoming a nightmare.

Faced with either a crawling dial-up connection or an astronomically expensive and spotty satellite connection, Beaudet opted for the latter, paying $400 to $500 a month to get online. “The cost of living was one of the main benefits why my family decided to have our home in the country,” he says. “We could afford a huge house with 13 acres if it’s in a rural area. But the high cost of Internet connectivity is really making it difficult for a small business like mine to succeed.”

Beaudet told his story to the Mountain Area Information Network (MAIN), a nonprofit community organization in western North Carolina. While Beaudet’s neighbors’ may be miles away, he’s not alone in hurting from lack of access to a high-speed connection, and last month MAIN collected 60 testimonies from residents in the area to document the digital divide.

Another testimony, from a couple in their eighties living in Graham County, recounts the difficulty they have keeping in touch with family using dial-up: “This may not seem important to most computer users, but it is to us. We like to see pictures of our grandchildren as they grow. We live in an area where there is no high speed Internet and it takes forever to download one picture. I may be old and slow but in this day and age my computer doesn’t need to be.”

But hope is on the horizon of the North Carolina hollers. New technology exists to expand and improve broadband access and wireless communications across the country.

On Nov. 4, the Federal Communications Commission will decide whether to open the vacant public airwaves between TV channels — called “white spaces” — for high-speed Internet access. FCC engineers just completed an exhaustive 18-month study that shows new technology can use white spaces without harming adjacent TV signals.

The agency has indicated its support for opening the airwaves for everyone. But there’s a problem. The public interest has run up against powerful corporate lobby, which wants to keep the white spaces all to themselves.

The Wrong Side of the Divide

Madison County is stunning, with the Appalachian Trail winding through the wooded hills and the French Broad River wooing paddlers and rafters. It’s an idyllic spot for a bed and breakfast – or so Martha Abraham thought.

Abraham started her business five years ago, forced to build and cultivate her Web presence using dial-up – what she calls a “very painful experience.” When she purchased an online booking system, she found that it was incompatible with dial-up, and “was reduced to continuing a paper calendar with hash marks.”

She finally got a satellite connection, but has been less than thrilled with the results. “Just writing this e-mail, I was thrown off the Web due to a storm in God knows what county,” she wrote.

Connie Topps faces similar frustrations living in the same county. She works as a freelance nature photographer, but the days of sending publishers actual film-based photos have passed. In a digital world, Topps’ dial-up connection won’t comply, and she often has to drive to the public library to upload and send her photos. “With the increasing cost of gasoline, this is becoming quite burdensome,” she says.

Topps isn’t the only one relying on the public library to save her from dial-up purgatory. Karen Vizzina is the program manager of the True Nature Country Fair in Macon County. “The fair office is my kitchen table, in my house on my farm,” she says.

But she says her dial-up connection is a constant cause of wasted time and loss of efficiency. “Just this morning I waited nearly 45 minutes for documents from the local health department to download,” she says. “When it is time to take online classes or do research in connection with my work or participate in an on-line conference call, I load up my computer and drive 40 minutes to the Macon County Public Library. Not only are my work hours limited by the library hours of operation, but I lose the travel time and spend those big dollars on gasoline.”

The stories of the detrimental affects of the digital divide don’t stop with Topps, and they certainly extend much farther than North Carolina — millions of Americans across the country do not have basic Internet access and must use antiquated and slow dial-up connections.

In a nation that increasingly demands high-speed Internet access to engage socially, politically and economically, half of the population is being left behind.

Changing the Situation

In the early days of television, the government established empty areas between TV channels to guard against broadcast interference. Over the years, great advances in technology have eliminated the need for these buffers.

New technology also makes broadband Internet service a viable option for this unused spectrum. White spaces could bring universal, affordable high-speed Internet access to millions of Americans now left off the grid.

Nearly every market in the United States has empty broadcast channels. In Juneau, Alaska, for example, as much as 74 percent of the broadcast spectrum could carry wireless Internet services. In the Dallas-Ft. Worth area, where airwaves are considerably more congested, 40 percent of the spectrum could be made available for new Internet and mobile services.
Companies like Motorola, Phillips and Microsoft have developed new wireless technology that protects broadcast channels and other services, such as wireless microphones, from interference. And the FCC has concluded that these devices can be used without harming existing television channels.

Delaying Tactics

Just as Beaudet and his neighbors could be offered some relief, a powerful group representing the nation’s largest media companies – the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) – is trying to keep Americans from gaining access to these airwaves.

Right now, NAB lobbyists are lining the halls of Congress to convince our lawmakers that using white spaces is a bad idea – despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, they claim white space devices will cause TV interference. And now they’re trying to delay the FCC’s ensuing decision – despite extensive public deliberation at the agency already.

The FCC has investigated white spaces for more than four years and reviewed 29,000 comments from the public. Undaunted, the NAB has upped the ante, hysterically claiming that supporters of opening white are intent on “destroying television.”

As the date for the FCC’s decision on white spaces nears, public interest groups are stepping up their fight to push the agency and Congress to open up the spectrum to unlicensed use.

And in North Carolina, residents are anxiously awaiting their high-speed connections. As one anonymous resident of Madison County laments, “It is unconscionable that in 2008, countless rural Americans still have virtually no access to high-speed Internet.”