Google.org, the company’s philanthropic arm, is working with other tech companies to create a database of unused TV white space. This database would allow future devices to tap into spectrum that’s not being used by someone else. The practice is called spectrum sharing, and it would allow mobile devices to share the air waves with other devices and services on this particular band.

Here’s how Google explains it:

Spectrum is a globally finite resource, which makes it crucial that it be allocated and shared as effectively as possible. The demand for spectrum is growing, and more people and devices need spectrum in the same place. Having a place where people can see what spectrum is available allows people to share, which enables more technology and devices to connect using an increasingly busy medium. This helps avoid conflict between devices using the same band.

As part of its bid to become a database administrator of this TV white space, Google has partnered with the FCC to create a map of all the available TV White Space in the U.S. The company is inviting multiple stakeholders to “test and provide feedback on the database.”

You can start exploring the spectrum map here.

The deal also includes AT&T handing over to Verizon Advanced Wireless Services (AWS) spectrum licenses in markets such as Phoenix, Los Angeles, Fresno, and Portland, Oregon.

The transaction is subject to regulatory approval by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), but AT&T expects the transaction to be completed sometime in the second half of 2013.

The transaction is part of a 700 MHz spectrum sale that Verizon announced last year. The sale is part of an agreement made with U.S. regulators so that Verizon could acquire spectrum from cable companies such as Comcast and Time Warner.

This spectrum acquisition comes just after AT&T announced this week that it will buy Alltel for $780 million. Alltel is a smaller wireless carrier that serves around 585,000 subscribers in the rural areas of Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Illinois, Ohio, and Idaho. AT&T announced last year that its goal is to provide 300 million Americans with access to its 4G LTE network by 2014.

“This transaction will enable us to strengthen our business and become a more robust competitor,” said Dan Hesse, Sprint’s CEO. “Acquiring this spectrum will significantly increase Sprint’s network capacity and improve the customer experience in several important Midwest markets including Chicago and St. Louis. We welcome the new customers in these markets and look forward to providing them with Sprint’s unique combination of unlimited plans, an iconic device portfolio and unmatched customer service.”

The agreement will provide Sprint with 20 MHz of PCS spectrum in the 1900 band in Chicago and other markets, and 10 MHz of PCS spectrum in the St. Louis market. Sprint will also receive 585,000 current U.S. Cellular customers and will assume “certain liabilities” as a part of the sale.

Sprint last month announced a $767 million net loss for the third quarter 2012. Much of the reason for the loss, according to Sprint, is its massive program to upgrade its network and the expected shutdown of the Nextel platform. Sprint is currently the third largest U.S. wireless company by subscriber numbers, though T-Mobile pushed closer last month after its acquisition of MetroPCS.

According to a new study from CTIA, American mobile users have consumed 1.1 trillion megabytes between July 2011 and June 2012. That’s a massive increase of 104 percent over last year’s 568 million megabytes. All this data consumption must mean people are using mobile devices a lot more, right? Surprisingly, that is not the case. The study found that mobile use only rose three percent over the last year.

So, what’s causing the increase in data? A number of factors seem to be at play here. For one, MMS message use is on the rise. The regular SMS text message is still the king with 2.273 trillion text messages sent over the last year, but mobile users sent a combined 58.3 billion MMS messages over the last year. That’s a 10.6 percent increase over last year.

The CTIA also attributes the growth to increases in cell sites around the country. They found that wireless carriers have added 28,641 cell sites over the last year for a total of 285,561. The carriers are also upgrading more of their 3G networks to 4G. This only further encourages more data use as more people have access to faster networks for streaming video, music, and other data intensive services.

“As our survey proves, today’s wireless industry offers consumers not only the world’s best products and services, but also the best value. Americans are using more voice, data and text than ever before, but are paying less for their wireless usage than even a year ago. Thanks to the fiercely competitive wireless industry, consumers have a variety of choices from which provider to contract or prepaid plans to devices,” said Steve Largent, President and CEO of CTIA. “With the persistent increase in usage, this survey is another proof point for why our members need more spectrum to meet consumer demands. We appreciate the FCC’s NPRM on the incentive auction of broadcast television spectrum and hope that its brought to market quickly so that our members may continue to innovate and invest in our nation’s economy.”

As Largent points out above, the continued growth of mobile data consumption is becoming increasingly reliant on carriers buying up more spectrum. At its current growth, mobile data consumption could eat through the amount of available spectrum in just a few years. Wireless carriers will need to buy up more spectrum to provide the necessary bandwidth that users expect.

You can check out a preview of the CTIA’s report here. They also have the full survey available for purchase if that’s your thing.

The DoJ is, however, requiring some changes to the agreements concerning the sale of bundled wireless and wireline services and the formation of a technology research joint venture. Through the joint venture, Verizon would collaborate with the cable companies to develop new technologies that integrate wireless and wireline products.

“By limiting the scope and duration of the commercial agreements among Verizon and the cable companies while at the same time allowing Verizon and T-Mobile to proceed with their spectrum acquisitions, the department has provided the right remedy for competition and consumers,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division, Joseph Wayland. “The Antitrust Division’s enforcement action ensures that robust competition between Verizon and the cable companies continues now and in the future as technological change alters the telecommunications landscape.”

The proposed settlement forbids Verizon from selling cable company products in FiOS areas. It also removes contractual restrictions on Verizon’s ability to sell FiOS. Verizon will also no longer be able to resell cable companies’ services to customers in arreas where it sells DSL Internet services after December of 2016.

Verizon’s agreements with the cable companies are required to be amended in the following ways:

• Verizon retains the ability to sell bundles of services that include DSL, Verizon Wireless and the video services of a direct broadcast satellite company (i.e., DirecTV or Dish Network);
• After five years, the cable companies are no longer barred from selling the wireless services of Verizon Wireless’s competitors, and may partner with other wireless providers;
• The cable companies can elect to resell Verizon Wireless services using their own brand at any time as provided for under the amended agreements; and
• U pon dissolution of the technology joint venture, all members receive a non-exclusive license to all the joint venture’s technology, and each may then choose to sublicense to other competitors.

Finally, the settlement forbids any form of collusion and the exchange of competitively sensitive information.

Read the DoJ’s full announcement here.

Opposition over the deal, however, appears to be growing. Public Knowledge and a number of other public interest groups as well as wireless carriers including Sprint and T-Mobile, have been very vocal in their concerns over the agreement. In February, they even filed a petition to deny the transfer and its additional agreements.

In the petition, the groups wrote:

“It does not take the celebratory plaudits of Wall Street analysts to recognize that these proposed transactions would fundamentally alter the nature of the telecommunications world in a manner utterly contrary to that intended by the 1996 Telecommunications Act. In the first place, Applicants have agreed to transfer more spectrum to the largest wireless operator, aggravating existing anticompetitive problems with spectrum aggregation. In addition, Applicants have agreed to three critical side agreements bearing on each other’s businesses that give rise to serious concern that not only will these providers decline to compete further with one another, they will actively collude with one another.”

These groups fear the deal would give Verizon too much power and thus harm competition and consumers. In a recent interview with Art Brodsky of Public Knowledge, he told us that, during the debate surrounding AT&T’s bid to buy T-Mobile, which, of course, didn’t happen, Verizon had said it didn’t need anymore spectrum for the foreseeable future. Now, the company’s view seems to have changed since it has argued that the deal should go through to avoid a “spectrum crunch.”

“What you have in this deal is some really prime spectrum going to the largest carrier, which already has more than anybody else,” said Brodsky.

Last week’s hearing from the antitrust subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee tried to determine if the consortium of cable companies had reached out to other carriers before Verizon. But, Brodsky told us that the topic was left unanswered.

“The bigger is getting bigger, and the smaller is fading away because they’re not able to have access to the raw material of wireless, which is spectrum,” he said.

In addition to the spectrum aspect, the deal would also include a joint-marketing agreement that, according to Brodsky would have “all sorts of implications for competition, none of which are good.” Specifically, this area would enable Verizon to sell cable’s high-speed Web product, while also allowing the cable companies to sell Verizon’s product.

At last week’s hearing, Senator Herb Kohl, who is the chair of the antitrust subcommittee, asked Verizon and the cable companies if they were calling a “truce” and standing down as rivals. He expressed concern that the deal would undo the progress that had been made in regards to competition over the past several years.

“There’s absolutely no incentive for Verizon, the cable company, to build out or improve its data product because its affiliate is gonna be selling Comcast or Bright House or Time Warner,” said Brodsky.

He went on to say that it would also decrease competition via FiOS. Also, since most places don’t have FiOS, he said that the majority of consumers would either have very slow copper-based DSL or cable options, since Verizon doesn’t plan on further build-out of the platform.

Another point of contention with the deal is the “Joint Operating Agreement,” which has been nicknamed “JOE.” According to Verizon and the cable companies, the agreement is a research project. Those in opposition, however, believe that it could lead to anti-competitive measures.

As Brodsky explained, JOE would allow the companies to create new technology and thus control this new innovation. He, and others, believes that JOE could also give Verizon and the cable companies the power to determine whether or not other players could integrate or adopt them.

“They could keep it to themselves, they could license it at exorbitant fees, [and] they could act in all sorts of anti-competitive ways,” he said.

Since the deal has received a large outcry of opposition, the FCC and the Department of Justice are still investigating the agreements. Brodsky told us that, while he is hopeful that it won’t be approved, he is pessimistic about it given antitrust cases of late.

Incidentally, Rick Rule, who was the lead attorney for Microsoft in the DOJ’s antitrust case against it, testified at last week’s hearing and predicted that it would be approved.

“A transaction that takes assets that are producing zero and is going to put the assets in hands of a company that is going to generate some output from those assets is by definition not a violation of the antitrust laws,” he said.

Do you think the deal will be approved? Could you see it impacting consumers positively or negatively? Let us know.

Complaints from T-Mobile USA, Sprint Nextel, Public Knowledge, and the National Consumer Law Center have been filed with the FCC, trying to get Verizon’s efforts blocked.

WebProNews interviewed Public Knowledge staff attorney Jodie Griffin about the situation. She says it could be “to the detriment of smaller wireless carriers and to the detriment of consumers”.

Watch the interview above for more on the Public Knowledge side of the story. Griffin also addresses the spectrum auctions that are part of the payroll tax cut bill.

For more on the auctions, check out our exclusive interview with Bruce Mehlman, the former Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Tech Policy and the Co-Chair of the Internet Innovation Alliance.

Verizon’s deal is under review from both the FCC and the DoJ.

Essentially, broadcasters with spectrum to spare forfeit the extra, and get some of the money the auctions generate.

CTIA – The Wireless Association President and CEO Steve Largent issued the following statement:

“For more than three years, CTIA and its members have been advocating for more spectrum so America’s wireless industry can remain the world’s leader in the deployment of advanced wireless services. Today’s bipartisan vote to pass the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act, which includes provisions to make a substantial swath of spectrum available for commercial use, represents an important step toward meeting the industry’s spectrum needs.

“Ultimately, today’s vote was a resounding victory for consumers and the American economy. Making spectrum available will make it possible for America’s wireless carriers to offer consumers better, faster, more ubiquitous wireless broadband service. The release of additional spectrum also will spur the investment and job creation that our economy needs.”

Additionally, CNET shares statements from AT&T and Sprint:

“This provides procedural safeguards, and also an opportunity for a court challenge,” said Jim Cicconi, head of legislative affairs for AT&T, said in a statement. “We take the FCC Chairman at his word when he says there is no intent to have closed auctions that deny AT&T and other carriers the ability to fairly and fully participate, but we also feel it important that Congress has now made its views clear as well.”

“Sprint agrees with the Federal Communications Commission that all wireless carriers–small, regional and large–should have a meaningful chance to participate in wireless spectrum auctions,” Vonya B. McCann, senior vice president of Government Affairs for Sprint, said in a statement. “While we didn’t see the need to amend the statute, the compromise language approved by the conferees preserves the FCC’s ability to promote competition as it conducts future wireless spectrum auctions.”

WebProNews recently interviewed Bruce Mehlman, former Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Tech Policy & Co-Chair of the Internet Innovation Alliance. Here’s what he had to say about the auctions:

The CTIA found that the number of wireless subscriber connections has surpassed the number of people in the U.S. and its territories. It also found a 111 percent increase in wireless data traffic.

While the situation is by all means challenging, the massive eruption of content that sparked it is both encouraging and exciting.

“We’re in this exciting arms race where the creation of content is happening so fast it’s exceeding even these amazing improvements in computing power, these amazing improvements in storage capacity, and particularly, these amazing improvements in connectivity,” said Bruce Mehlman, the former Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Tech Policy and the Co-Chair of the Internet Innovation Alliance.

To help solve this problem of congestion, Congress is currently examining legislation that would free up more spectrum from broadcast radio and television companies. While everyone agrees that more spectrum is needed, the dispute is over how it would be distributed and, specifically, the FCC’s role in this process.

In the past, the FCC has had a very active position in managing the auctions. In other words, it has had the power to place restrictions on auctions or conditions on spectrum based on the bidders’ market dominance and spectrum holdings.

However, the bill that’s currently in the House would remove this power from the FCC, which is a move that is sparking a lot of debate. Former FCC Chairman Reed Hundt recently called the proposed bill “the single worst telecom bill” he’d ever seen.

The House argues that previous government allocations are the reason that the current “spectrum crunch” is happening. It also believes that limitations in auctions would result in less revenue to help reduce the federal deficit.

As Mehlman explained to us, Congress is remembering what happened in the controversial 2008 spectrum auctions as well as the recent failed merger of AT&T and T-Mobile. He sides with policymakers on this issue because he believes the previous restrictions are to blame for the current problems.

In a post on the Internet Innovation Alliance, Mehlman wrote:

Many in Congress fear FCC micromanagement and seek open auction rules free from FCC interference. The FCC, of course, objects to Congressional micromanagement of their micromanagement, seeking maximum flexibility to set auction rules.

The irony here is that these auctions are needed because the last time this spectrum was assigned, policy makers limited its potential use and transfer. Thus much of the spectrum is under-utilized and our economy suffers for it.

In our recent interview, he expressed concern that the same issues would continue if the FCC were permitted to keep its authority.

“The biggest challenge is if the FCC gets its way and follows through with what many in the House fear they might do, which is limit who’s allowed to compete, I think the very spectrum crunch these very auctions are expected to alleviate doesn’t get alleviated… then problems continue,” pointed out Mehlman.

“I think most people would concede the reason there’s inefficient use of spectrum is because of old government decisions on who could and could not use spectrum,” he continued. “Logically, you want less government constraints in the future.”

Some mobile companies are perfectly happy with the FCC’s authority over the auctions as a group of them led by Sprint and T-Mobile sent a letter to lawmakers asking that the Commission’s position remain the same. AT&T and Verizon are not part of this support since they believe the FCC would favor the smaller carriers.

Incidentally, not everyone agrees that auctions would solve the issue. Rick Whitt, Google’s Washington Managing Counsel, recently indicated that auctions would not completely eliminate the spectrum crunch saying, “Auctions will fall short of meeting that gap.”

Mehlman told us that he agrees with Whitt in that content will likely be created faster than bandwidth can be apportioned. But, he believes that this provides an even greater urgency to get policy in place that would encourage an open marketplace.

“Having everybody eligible to acquire the spectrum and to subsequently sell the spectrum to a higher and better user is letting the market allocate the spectrum,” he said. “If we had done that the first time, we would have less congestion, we’d have more high speed wireless, and, I think, we’d have the same amount of competition.”

“We don’t have a problem with lack of competition, we have a problem with a lack of investment, [and] we have a problem with a lack of spectrum aggregation to meet the marketplace needs,” he added.

Even though Sinclair Broadcast Group CEO David Smith said it was doubtful that Republicans and Democrats would be able to agree on legislation for a broadcast television auction this year, Mehlman thinks it is a possibility. As he explained, this legislation is part of larger jobs bill that both sides want to see pass.

Should auctions be open, or should the FCC have a say? What do you think? We’d love to hear your thoughts.

Verizon will flip the switch tomorrow on networks in Glens Falls and Utica in New York, Brownsville and McAllen in Texas, and Lawton, Oklahoma. Networks in Atlanta, Houston, and Spokane are being expanded.

Users connected to Verizon’s 4G network should generally experience downlink rates from 5 to 12 megabits per second (Mbps), and uplink speeds of 2-5 Mbps.

Verizon offers a wide variety of 4G devices on its network, including LG’s Spectrum, which was announced at CES 2012, the Samsung Galaxy Tab 7.7, and Motorola’s Droid line of phones. The iPhone 4S is not LTE capable, so it cannot run on Verizon’s network (a problem AT&T worked around by dual-layering their LTE network with an HSPA+ network, which the iPhone 4S is compatible with). The next-generation iPhone, presumably coming this summer, will probably have LTE capability.