Verizon agrees to personality transplant

Sweet talks non-Verizon phones


Just two months after it launched a legal attack against the Federal Communications Commission for embracing open access to the US wireless spectrum, Verizon has embraced open access to the US wireless spectrum.

Today, the mega telco announced that it will soon give its wireless customers the option of using devices, software and applications that don't come straight from the company itself.

This is the wireless world equivalent of the Soviet Union embracing democracy - though Verizon president and CEO Lowell McAdam put it a little differently.

"This is a transformation point in the 20-year history of mass market wireless devices – one which we believe will set the table for the next level of innovation and growth," he said in a canned statement. "Verizon Wireless is not changing our successful retail model, but rather adding an additional retail option for customers looking for a different wireless experience."

At the moment, American customers can only access Verizon's network with Verizon-approved devices and Verizon-approved applications, a restriction that severely limits your freedom of wireless expression. But now Verizon is removing the shackles. Or at least, it says it is.

Verizon's "Any Apps, Any Device" option will be available on its existing nationwide wireless network by the end of 2008. But there's no doubt that Verzion has made this move with an eye on the so-called 700-MHz band, a prime portion of US wireless spectrum due to be auctioned off by the FCC in January.

This summer, the FCC attached an open access requirement to the band, decreeing that the winning bidder would have no choice but to allow the use of any device and any application on these airwaves. This move was praised by the likes of Google and uber-startup Frontline Wireless - two potential bidders - but Verizon had a very different reaction. The telco asked a federal appeals court to remove this open access requirement.

In the "petition for review" it filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals, Verizon called the FCC's decision "arbitrary, capricious, unsupported by substantial evidence, and otherwise contrary to law".

But Verizon couldn't get the court to hear this petition before the FCC's auction, and it soon let the case drop. And now it's decided that open access is just peachy.

Well, sort of. Verizon is sure that "most Verizon Wireless customers" still prefer Verizon-controlled devices and apps. In offering open access, the company says, it's satisfying a "small but growing number" of people. You have to wonder how open Verizon's network will actually be.

Third party devices won't be allowed on the network unless they've been approved by Verizon - in Verizon's labs. And third party developers must foot the bill for these tests.

Whatever the case, it looks like Verizon will lay down a bid for the 700-MHz band, pitting its wits against Google and Frontline. Google has all but confirmed that it will join the auction, and though Frontline won't reveal its specific plans, you can bet it will lay down a bid as well.

Frontline was created specifically to build a brand new wireless network, and it intends to open up that network in much the same way the internet is open. "We think it's doable to build out a nationwide broadband wireless network along the internet model," Frontline Wireless chairman Janice Obuchowski told us. "Part of that model involves making the network far more accessible to all sorts of comers: content providers, handset providers, and the rest."

We don't expect this sort of unfettered openness from Verizon. ®


Other stories you might like

  • Google has more reasons why it doesn't like antitrust law that affects Google
    It'll ruin Gmail, claims web ads giant

    Google has a fresh list of reasons why it opposes tech antitrust legislation making its way through Congress but, like others who've expressed discontent, the ad giant's complaints leave out mention of portions of the proposed law that address said gripes.

    The law bill in question is S.2992, the Senate version of the American Innovation and Choice Online Act (AICOA), which is closer than ever to getting votes in the House and Senate, which could see it advanced to President Biden's desk.

    AICOA prohibits tech companies above a certain size from favoring their own products and services over their competitors. It applies to businesses considered "critical trading partners," meaning the company controls access to a platform through which business users reach their customers. Google, Apple, Amazon, and Meta in one way or another seemingly fall under the scope of this US legislation. 

    Continue reading
  • Makers of ad blockers and browser privacy extensions fear the end is near
    Overhaul of Chrome add-ons set for January, Google says it's for all our own good

    Special report Seven months from now, assuming all goes as planned, Google Chrome will drop support for its legacy extension platform, known as Manifest v2 (Mv2). This is significant if you use a browser extension to, for instance, filter out certain kinds of content and safeguard your privacy.

    Google's Chrome Web Store is supposed to stop accepting Mv2 extension submissions sometime this month. As of January 2023, Chrome will stop running extensions created using Mv2, with limited exceptions for enterprise versions of Chrome operating under corporate policy. And by June 2023, even enterprise versions of Chrome will prevent Mv2 extensions from running.

    The anticipated result will be fewer extensions and less innovation, according to several extension developers.

    Continue reading
  • I was fired for blowing the whistle on cult's status in Google unit, says contractor
    The internet giant, a doomsday religious sect, and a lawsuit in Silicon Valley

    A former Google video producer has sued the internet giant alleging he was unfairly fired for blowing the whistle on a religious sect that had all but taken over his business unit. 

    The lawsuit demands a jury trial and financial restitution for "religious discrimination, wrongful termination, retaliation and related causes of action." It alleges Peter Lubbers, director of the Google Developer Studio (GDS) film group in which 34-year-old plaintiff Kevin Lloyd worked, is not only a member of The Fellowship of Friends, the exec was influential in growing the studio into a team that, in essence, funneled money back to the fellowship.

    In his complaint [PDF], filed in a California Superior Court in Silicon Valley, Lloyd lays down a case that he was fired for expressing concerns over the fellowship's influence at Google, specifically in the GDS. When these concerns were reported to a manager, Lloyd was told to drop the issue or risk losing his job, it is claimed. 

    Continue reading
  • UK competition watchdog seeks to make mobile browsers, cloud gaming and payments more competitive
    Investigation could help end WebKit monoculture on iOS devices

    The United Kingdom's Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) on Friday said it intends to launch an investigation of Apple's and Google's market power with respect to mobile browsers and cloud gaming, and to take enforcement action against Google for its app store payment practices.

    "When it comes to how people use mobile phones, Apple and Google hold all the cards," said Andrea Coscelli, Chief Executive of the CMA, in a statement. "As good as many of their services and products are, their strong grip on mobile ecosystems allows them to shut out competitors, holding back the British tech sector and limiting choice."

    The decision to open a formal investigation follows the CMA's year-long study of the mobile ecosystem. The competition watchdog's findings have been published in a report that concludes Apple and Google have a duopoly that limits competition.

    Continue reading
  • Google offers $118m to settle gender discrimination lawsuit
    Don't even think about putting LaMDA on the compensation committee

    Google has promised to cough up $118 million to settle a years-long gender-discrimination class-action lawsuit that alleged the internet giant unfairly pays men more than women.

    The case, launched in 2017, was led by three women, Kelly Ellis, Holly Pease, and Kelli Wisuri, who filed a complaint alleging the search giant hires women in lower-paying positions compared to men despite them having the same qualifications. Female staff are also less likely to get promoted, it was claimed.

    Gender discrimination also exists within the same job tier, too, the complaint stated. Google was accused of paying women less than their male counterparts despite them doing the same work. The lawsuit was later upgraded to a class-action status when a fourth woman, Heidi Lamar, joined as a plaintiff. The class is said to cover more than 15,000 people.

    Continue reading
  • Google recasts Anthos with hitch to AWS Outposts
    If at first you don't succeed, change names and try again

    Google Cloud's Anthos on-prem platform is getting a new home under the search giant’s recently announced Google Distributed Cloud (GDC) portfolio, where it will live on as a software-based competitor to AWS Outposts and Microsoft Azure Stack.

    Introduced last fall, GDC enables customers to deploy managed servers and software in private datacenters and at communication service provider or on the edge.

    Its latest update sees Google reposition Anthos on-prem, introduced back in 2020, as the bring-your-own-server edition of GDC. Using the service, customers can extend Google Cloud-style management and services to applications running on-prem.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022