Ars Technica reports that Rep. Doris Matsui has introduced the Broadband Adoption Act of 2013. The bill would modify the Lifeline program to provide cheaper broadband Internet services to low-income families across the country.

“In today’s digital economy, if you don’t have access to the Internet you are simply at a competitive disadvantage. For example, more than 80 percent of available jobs now require online applications,” said Congresswoman Matsui. “The Internet is increasingly the economic engine for growth and innovation. The Lifeline program provides a tangible service to lower-income Americans and it is imperative that the Lifeline program be reformed and modernized to account for broadband services. We must ensure lower-income Americans have a greater opportunity to participate in the digital economy, whether it be for workforce training, education, finding a job or creating the next big idea.”

Matsui says that a recent FCC report found that nearly 100 million Americans are without broadband Internet services. She places the blame squarely on the high cost of broadband Internet in America. Many low income families simply can’t afford the high cost of broadband Internet. The bill would help to make faster Internet affordable to all.

Of course, the Broadband Adoption Act of 2013 isn’t just about providing faster Internet to low-income families. Matsui has envisioned a number of reforms to the Lifeline program for the FCC to enact if the bill were to become law:

It’s hard to see how anybody in the telecom industry would be opposed to this bill. It would net ISPs more subscribers to their expensive broadband plans while receiving plenty of free government money. There’s an argument to be had that we can’t be spending more money on social welfare programs, but the counterargument is that universal Internet access is worth it.

The New York Times reports that Genachowski has announced his resignation from the FCC this morning. He’s expected to formally leave the Commission in the coming weeks.

This isn’t the first departure from the FCC in recent weeks. Commissioner Robert M. McDowell recently announced that he would be leaving the Commission after serving since 2006. Both departures leave the FCC with two open spots that are to be filled in the coming months.

Aside from the National Broadband Plan, Genachowski’s departure throws the fate of other FCC pet projects into question. For one, the FCC was trying to sell unused TV airwaves to mobile carrier operators. Broadcasters resisted the sale, however, and it remains to be seen if Genachowski’s successor will continue to push for the sale.

Another plan with an unclear fate it the City Gigabit Challenge. It pushed for each state to offer at least one gigabit network by 2015. It could be just the kick the Internet needs in the US, but his successor may not encourage such an endeavor.

Despite such concerns, Genachowski is confident in the FCC’s ability to continue its work:

“While there are challenges ahead in this fast-moving, globally competitive sector, a revitalized FCC is prepared to continue taking them on. I’m deeply grateful to President Obama for his vision, friendship, and the opportunity to serve our country. I’m proud of what we’ve done together to harness technology to advance the American dream for the 21st century. I know you’ll continue to fight hard to fulfill this agency’s vital mission, and I look forward to continuing to work together until my last day at the agency, and to count you as family and as an inspiration for long after that.”

Hopefully that work includes delivering broadband to the 19 million Americans who still don’t have it.

Telecompetitor reports that the first FCC-hosted gigabit workshop will take place in Washington D.C. on March 27. The Commission isn’t saying what will happen at the workshop, but it revealed a rough idea of what the workshops will accomplish in the release:

The goal of this workshop is to explore how current gigabit communities deployed their networks, the economic and social benefits that accrue to gigabit communities, ways communities can aggregate demand in order to make a gigabit network deployment more economically appealing, and how communities can leverage their assets to incent an ultra-fast network.

Here’s hoping not all the workshops take place in D.C. It would be more advantageous for everyone if the FCC were to host a number of workshops in regions around the country so that every state can get in on the action.

Even with these workshops, it will be a daunting task to get a gigabit network in every state. The incumbent ISPs will lobby against any serious competition brought against them while arguing that nobody wants gigabit speeds in the first place. These workshops will hopefully prove once and for all that the majority wants gigabit speeds, and will do anything to get it.

If you want to check out the first workshop, it will be held in the Commission Meeting Room at the FCC headquarters.

And they totally support it.

In a statement that can only be seen as a huge win for activists in this arena, the White House just announced that “it’s time to legalize cellphone unlocking.”

“The White House agrees with the 114,000+ of you who believe that consumers should be able to unlock their cell phones without risking criminal or other penalties,” said Senior Advisor for Internet, Innovation, & Privacy David Edelman. “In fact, we believe the same principle should also apply to tablets, which are increasingly similar to smart phones. And if you have paid for your mobile device, and aren’t bound by a service agreement or other obligation, you should be able to use it on another network. It’s common sense, crucial for protecting consumer choice, and important for ensuring we continue to have the vibrant, competitive wireless market that delivers innovative products and solid service to meet consumers’ needs.”

In January, unlocking new cellphones became illegal via a decision from the Library of Congress. In short, they reversed their decision to exempt cellphone unlocking from the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. It’s still legal to unlock phones purchased before January 26th, but doing so on any device purchased after that cutoff mean you could run afoul of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

Edelman goes on to explain that the Department of Commerce’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) previously made their opinion on the matter known – full support for the concept of cellphone unlocking. But that the NTIA’s recommendation was ultimately rejected by the Library of Congress.

The Library of Congress also released a statement.

“The rulemaking is a technical, legal proceeding and involves a lengthy public process,” they said.

And although they recognize that “rulemaking serves a very important function, but it was not intended to be a substitute for deliberations of broader public policy,” it doesn’t look like the Library is planning on fast-tracking the will of the people here (and now the White House).

“Clearly the White House and Library of Congress agree that the DMCA exception process is a rigid and imperfect fit for this telecommunications issue, and we want to ensure this particular challenge for mobile competition is solved,” said Edelman, also noting that the White House respects the process performed by the Librarian of establishing and eliminating exceptions – in this case having to do with the DMCA.

Here’s what the White House says about moving forward:

The Obama Administration would support a range of approaches to addressing this issue, including narrow legislative fixes in the telecommunications space that make it clear: neither criminal law nor technological locks should prevent consumers from switching carriers when they are no longer bound by a service agreement or other obligation.

We also believe the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), with its responsibility for promoting mobile competition and innovation, has an important role to play here. FCC Chairman Genachowski today voiced his concern about mobile phone unlocking, and to complement his efforts, NTIA will be formally engaging with the FCC as it addresses this urgent issue.

Last week, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said that the FCC would be looking into the issue.

Back in January, the Library of Congress decided that the unlocking of cellphones would no longer reside on the exemptions lists for the Digital Millennium Copyright Act – a move that basically turned unlocking cellphones into an illegal activity. As of right now, it’s still legal to unlock phones purchased before January 26th, but unlocking phones purchased past that date will run you afoul of the DMCA.

Of course, many feel that unlocking cellphones should be legal in all respects – it’s their device once they buy it, and it’s that simple.

Late last month, a petition on the White House’s We The People site to make unlocking legal crossed the required signature threshold, which means that the Obama administration is forced (to a certain extent) to issue an official response. While we’re still waiting for that response, today we learn that the Federal Communications Commission will look into the matter.

“The ban raises competition concerns; it raises innovation concerns,” FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski told TechCrunch.

“It’s something that we will look at at the FCC to see if we can and should enable consumers to use unlocked phones.”

At this point, Genachowski isn’t sure about what power the FCC has to enact change in this matter. But they will look into it.

In the meantime, we will wait on the White House’s response. That petition currently boasts over 112,000 signatures.

The FCC announced today that it has unanimously voted to free up 195 MHz of additional spectrum in the 5 GHz band. This new spectrum will be available to unlicensed devices. The Commission also proposed to relax regulations on wireless devices and to streamline existing rules.

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said the Commission is taking “a big step to ease congestion on traditional Wi-Fi networks, which will mean faster speeds and fewer headaches from U.S. consumers.”

The FCC notes that the freed up spectrum will not only help decrease congestion in public spaces, but it will help increase speeds of personal wireless networks in the home. That’s great news for those of who have multiple devices running on a single Wi-Fi network in the home.

Before you start lining up more devices on your personal network, know that the FCC has only voted on a proposal to free up the spectrum. The Commission now has to take public comments before making its final decision. The plan will probably not face any real opposition, however, as industry groups are already praising it.

The National Cable and Telecommunications Association said that the FCC’s bid to free up more spectrum will help meet increasing consumer demand:

“…existing Wi-Fi spectrum is growing increasingly congested and more must be found to meet skyrocketing consumer demand and enable increased speeds of next-generation Wi-Fi. More extensive use of the 5 GHz band, along with additional unlicensed spectrum in other bands, will permit cable companies and other innovators to continue to provide Americans with new benefits, businesses with new opportunities, and those in need with life-saving connections.”

The FCC’s proposal fits snugly into its National Broadband Plan that aims to increase access to broadband across the nation. Freeing up more Wi-Fi can help accomplish that, but let’s hope the Commission can get to work on setting up Gigabit networks across the nation as well.

[h/t: The Hill]

Let’s get the most important part of this report out of the way. Are ISPs not delivering advertised speeds? Some aren’t, but the majority of them are, at least during peak periods. The study found that in September of last year, ISPs delivered 97 percent of advertised speeds with some even going above and beyond the call of duty by offering over 100 percent of their advertised speeds.

Of course, there are some ISPs that are still not delivered anywhere near their advertised speeds. Some of these ISPs include AT&T, Qwest, Windstream and Lexington’s own Insight. All of which are offering anywhere between 80 and 90 percent of the advertised speeds.

Which ISPs are going above and beyond what they promise? Cablevision, Verizon Fiber and ViaSat are all offering more than 100 percent of their advertised speeds. Amazingly, ViaSat is offering almost 140 percent more than what they currently advertise in download streams.

Moving on, the FCC report reveals that consumers are continuing to migrate to faster Internet speeds. This is only a good thing as it’s once again proving wrong the concept that most Internet consumers don’t want faster speeds. In even further good news, 46 percent of consumers on 0 to 1 Mbps speed Internet moved up to a faster speed tier between April and September of last year. Unfortunately, the study doesn’t say to which tier these folks moved to, but it was enough to raise the average speed of the Internet in the U.S. to 15.6 Mbps. The FCC notes that this is an annualized increase of 20 percent.

Finally, the report found that satellite Internet is making huge leaps and bounds in terms of advertised speeds versus actual speeds. You already saw before that ViaSat was offering 140 percent of its advertised speeds, and that carries over to the actual charts which shows that satellite Internet providers on average offer 137 percent of their advertised speeds. Coming in second place is Fiber, which offers 115 percent of its advertised speeds. Cable is second with 98.5 percent, and DSL is last with 85.3 percent.

The FCC points out, however, that satellite Internet, which is largely offered as an alternative to rural homes that can’t access to terrestrial lines, still has issues with latency. That is the time it takes to connect and transfer information is still very slow compared to land lines. That being said, satellite Internet companies are improving their technology every year which has led to this year’s massive jump over its traditionally advertised speeds.

So, what can we take away from this report? It’s good that ISPs are still mostly delivering what they advertise, and that people are still upgrading to higher speeds. What the FCC report doesn’t take into account, however, is the prohibitive prices and refusal to expand that keep most consumers away from high speed Internet. Those issues need to be addressed before we start seeing truly remarkable results from these reports.

It seems that the FCC will be focusing on this more in the future. In a statement to The Hill, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said that “we most continue to see increases in broadband speed and capacity” to “unleash innovation and realize broadband’s full potential.” Let’s hope the Commission will actually do something about that this year.

Susan Crawford, former special assistant to President Obama for science, technology and innovation, recently went on air with veteran journalist Bill Moyers to talk about the current state of the Internet in the U.S. Here’s what you can expect to hear about:

“Government has allowed a few powerful media conglomerates to put profit ahead of the public interest – rigging the rules, raising prices, and stifling competition. As a result, Crawford says, all of us are at the mercy of the biggest business monopoly since Standard Oil in the first Gilded Age a hundred years ago.”

Susan Crawford on Why U.S. Internet Access is Slow, Costly, and Unfair from BillMoyers.com on Vimeo.

If you want to learn more about Internet monopolies and how it affects our economy, Crawford has written a book about it called Captive Audience: The Telecom Industry and Monopoly Power in the New Gilded Age.

[h/t: Gizmodo]

CNET reports that FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski recently met with a room full of mayors across the U.S. to issue a challenge to them. It’s called the “Gigabit City Challenge” and its goal is to have at least one city in every state outfitted with gigabit Internet by 2015. It’s a bit more ambitious than the original National Broadband Plan that categorized “broadband” as being 100 Mbps.

“American economic history teaches a clear lesson about infrastructure. If we build it, innovation will come,” said Genachowski. “The U.S. needs a critical mass of gigabit communities nationwide so that innovators can develop next-generation applications and services that will drive economic growth and global competitiveness.”

So, what spurred the FCC to finally start taking gigabit Internet expansion seriously? As you can imagine, the increased rate at which gigabit networks are being announced was a major contributor. The gigabit networks in Chattanooga, Kansas City and Seattle are specifically called out as being major innovators in bringing faster Internet to the masses.

Any of the aforementioned cities will tell you, however, that installing gigabit networks takes a lot of time, and more importantly, a lot of money. How is the FCC going to overcome the hurdle of established ISPs refusing to put forth the cash to renovate and expand their current networks? The Commission says it will establish “a new online clearinghouse of best practices to collect and disseminate information about how to lower the costs and increase the speed of broadband deployment nationwide.”

To compliment the new clearinghouse, the Commission will also “hold workshops on gigabit communities:”

The workshops will convene leaders from the gigabit community ecosystem—including broadband providers, and state and municipal leaders— to evaluate barriers, increase incentives, and lower the costs of speeding gigabit network deployment. Together, the workshops will inform the Commission’s clearinghouse of ways industry, and local and state leaders can meet the challenge to establish gigabit communities nationwide.

The FCC has honorable intentions with its latest “challenge,” but we’ll have to see if it can spur the change needed to bring gigabit broadband to every state in the U.S. ISPs have traditionally avoided these kind of major investments instead relying on slow Internet and abusive data caps to make a quick buck. Getting local government on board is a good first step, but now it has to find some common ground with an industry that doesn’t care much for the Commission or its regulations.

The Hill reports that Public Knowledge and Free Press are now asking the FCC to launch an investigation into how ISPs utilize data caps on their networks. The groups also want Congress to hold hearings on the issue to determine if data caps are really necessary. One report seems to think they aren’t.

A report from The New American Foundation late last year found that data caps are, by and large, used only to introduce false scarcity into the broadband market. This allows ISPs to retain high prices and charge users who use more data.

Advocacy groups also call out ISPs that use data caps as a way of discouraging competition. Many ISPs impose strict caps so consumers don’t stream as much video on services like Netflix so consumers are forced to subscribe to cable TV packages that the ISP also conveniently owns. Such actions are not punishable by law at the moment, but proposed legislation from Sen. Wyden would make it punishable under antitrust laws.

What do ISPs have to say about all of this? They claim that data caps are incredibly fair, and actually bring value to the consumer. The companies argue that having data tiers allows consumers who only use the Internet for email can pay for less while those who use a lot of data can pay for more. The major flaw with that reasoning, however, is that ISPs are still discouraging Internet use on their networks when they should be encouraging it. The Internet is a major force of innovation and education, and data caps only impede that in the name of short term profit.

So, how likely is the FCC to take on data caps? The Hill suggests that the commission may take on data caps if it can win its lawsuit against Verizon. The company claims that the FCC has no authority to implement net neutrality rules. If Verizon wins, it would set the kind of precedent that would make data cap regulation almost impossible.