SAN JOSE, CA -- The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Chairman Deborah Platt Majoras yesterday spoke in Aspen, Colorado at the annual Progress and Freedom Foundation gathering and stated, “proponents of net neutrality regulation have not come to us to explain where the market is failing or what anticompetitive conduct we should challenge.” This is a strong statement from a leading regulator who, in essence, stated that there haven’t been any problems so those proposing regulations on net neutrality should be extremely careful what they are asking for when the market generally will take care of any issues. She stated that if there were issues of anti-competitive behavior from providers of internet services that it would be proper for regulatory bodies to step in. FTC Chairman Deborah Platt MajorasFrom the FTC press release: Chairman Majoras said that competition generally leads to the best results for consumers, that free markets breed innovation, creativity, and entrepreneurship, and that markets -particularly dynamic markets -are usually self-correcting.”I ask myself whether consumers will stand for an Internet that suddenly imposes restrictions on their ability to freely explore the Internet or does not provide for the choices they want. And I further ask why network providers would not continue to compete for consumers’ dollars by offering more choices, not fewer. We make a mistake when we think about market scenarios simply as dealings between and among companies; let us not forget who reigns supreme: the consumer.” Read the full release here.For an on-location report on this speech, please see www.drewclark.com, where he reports Chairman Majoras stated,”I start by admitting my surprise at how quickly so many of our nation’s successful firms have jumped into urge the government to regulate.” She referred to the coalition of technology industry giants -Google, eBay, Microsoft and Yahoo are among the biggest names -that have entered the telecommunications debate seeking legislation that would require telecommunications and cable companies to provide non-discriminatory access to broadband services.I must say that I have stated this very sentiment before.
WASHINGTON, DC -- CBS News announced that it will simulcast the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric on the web. Brilliant. This is another announcement in the accelerating web 2.0 trend. OK, what is the Web 2.0? It may mean something different to just about everybody. But it seems to relate to emerging business models that have a lot to do with being web based, multimedia content, broadband enabled, ubiquitous connectivity, comfort with new ways of obtaining and sharing information, and advertising dollars or cost sharing that drive many of these new models. With the Katie Couric model, the content will be reproduced at minimal marginal cost, and revenue will be enhanced by advertising — not the same advertising as the TV broadcast — but different ads, no doubt targeted at a younger audience, which will also help CBS move closer to the advertising demographic sweet spot. And CBS viewership will be broadened by definition — not only can you watch it at home, but at work, in your car, on the train, or wherever you have connectivity. Your relationship with the evening network news has changed. Recent Web 2.0 related news includes Google’s $900 million deal with MySpace for search and advertising; a blue jeans promotion deal for a MySpace member with lots of MySpace ‘Friends,’ now something with possible market value; a YouTube video maker signed by the Carson Daly TV show to do content there; AOL’s move from a paid dial-up access and subscription service to a web-based advertising driven service; Foster’s beer’s decision to stop TV advertising in the U.S. and move to Internet advertising; a slew of recent deals to deliver movies over the net (note Cisco’s own investment in MovieBeam); political blogs supported by advertising; political campaigns and parties plugged-in; the exponential growth of social networking through Facebook, MySpace and others; on-line communities supporting all of the above, and tens of other examples. Which of these business models will thrive, and which will morph, zig -- zag, or fail, who knows. But one thing’s for sure, the ground continues to shift. Read More »
BRUSSELS -- With all of Europe’s focus on productivity, competitiveness and conforming to a globalized world, it still manages to keep its tradition of switching off in summer. In reality, Europeans are taking shorter holidays than the old days when families would spend all of August at their country home, hotel or campsite. The average grandes vacances of the summer have fallen to two to three weeks from four weeks a decade ago. Yet, the rituals of the European summer remain unchanged, particularly in the corridors of the European institutions in Brussels. Even if some officials are hard at work -- particularly those focused on security (see my previous blog entry), foreign affairs and aid workers in Lebanon, most European Union (EU) officials (in the Commission, Parliament and Council) are off duty from end of July until la rentree in the last week of August. The European Commissioners have taken a six week break away from Brussels and will only meet again on Wednesday, August 30th. No EU major decisions/laws will be taken or adopted in their absence. The streets of Brussels around the European institutions are mostly empty and quiet-no European civil servants or lobbyists around here. Even the best weekly newspaper on EU affairs, The European Voice , takes off the month of August. Read More »
WASHINGTON, DC -- Many things will no doubt be learned from the UK’s and US’s ability to foil the planned attack on US airliners crossing the Pond — one thing for sure is a reminder of the importance of the threat vector. One of the very good shifts in US homeland security policy has been Secretary Chertoff’s emphasis on risk management — and running the calculus of vulnerability, threat and consequence. All too often, particularly in the past, many people seemed to predominately focus on the vulnerabilities and consequences, and underweight the focus on the threat. This led to a ‘secure everything’ view of the world — one that would be nirvana for sure — but in reality, nearly impossible, and with real direct and indirect costs. Perhaps this sub optimal alignment of focus is easy to understand — the threat is the thing that is more fully outside of our control — and harder to have visibility into, understand, and affect — particularly overseas. But the Brits’ reported ability to gain and use information about the plot — the imminent threat — and seemingly extinguish the threat — was the operative vector here. Of course vulnerabilities and consequences remain important, but one lesson re-learned is the critical nature of discovering and reducing the threat. This principle is applicable in may security circumstances, including network security, critical infrastructure protection, and fraud and crime committed over the net. As technology innovation continues to advance in defending networks and people, so too must continued advances be made in discovering and reducing the threat. There have been good steps forward in critical infrastructure protection in the US and elsewhere through increased intelligence capabilities and information sharing, and in the crime prevention area through increased prosecution of individuals and groups responsible for crime and fraud committed over the net. The foiling of this plot reminds us of how much more can and should be done. It also reminds us of the importance of maintaining flexibility and innovation in security defense. The UK plotters adjusted their weapons to circumvent the aviation defenses previously put in place — moving from knives to liquid bombs chosen no doubt to avoid x-ray and magnetic detection. They also reportedly had an insider, a technique centuries old. The ability to constantly adjust defenses, react to a new risk management calculus, and detect anomalies is crucial — another good reason why sound public policy dictates that the governments not mandate or set in stone the use of particular security technologies — they may be outdated or or provide a roadmap for circumvention the minute the cement is dry. In a security game of cat and mouse, innovation and flexibility — and the proper attention to the threat — enhance security.
BRUSSELS -- Britain foiled what could have been the biggest terrorist attack in its history last week,”mass murder on an unimaginable scale”, as Paul Stephenson, the deputy chief of London’s Metropolitan police put it. The uncovering of a plot to destroy several aircraft over the Atlantic has boosted the image of British police and particularly the country’s security services. Details are still emerging, but it is clear that co-operation between national intelligence services and advanced electronic surveillance are alive and well and improving. British security sources acknowledge Pakistani assistance but most importantly their electronic interception of messages between the alleged terrorists in the UK and their links and direction somewhere in Pakistan as the main source of intelligence. For Europeans, the danger is internal, inside our borders, and it appears to be growing; there is a general unease about this terrorist threat being home-grown. The terrorists’operation thankfully failed but Europeans are paying a price. The hundreds of cancelled flights in and out of Heathrow airport and the stringent new security regulations have affected hundreds of thousands and will inconvenience more air travelers. The damage to race relations and acceptance of different cultures could be even more severe in an increasing multi-ethnic Europe. But, the battle against terrorism will continue, with increased fervor. The Commission and Finnish Presidency will convene a meeting of EU Home and Justice Affairs Ministers (extremely unusual in the middle of August) next week to discuss a further strengthening of cooperation between intelligence services and improvements to electronic surveillance systems.