FCC drags feet on free wireless Internet proposal
In May of 2006, the FCC received an application from the California based corporation, M2Z Networks, that would allow the construction of a nationwide wireless broadband network. The end result would mean free, wireless Internet access for an estimated 95% of Americans.
But M2Z has not yet received a reply, despite the requirement for the FCC to make a public interest determination on the license by May 5, 2007.
“We strongly believe that the FCC should fully and fairly review the detailed record associated with M2Z’s license application and its forbearance petition and make a decision consistent with the law Congress enacted,” said Uzoma Onyeije, Vice President of Regulatory Affairs for M2Z Networks.
“The law” refers to Section 7 of the Telecommunications Act, which states: “the Commission shall determine whether any new technology or service proposed in a petition or application is in the public interest within one year after such petition or application is filed.”
M2Z, attempting to receive a response, has informed the FCC that it will be seeking a Writ of Mandamus from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The Writ will ask the court to command an immediate response from the FCC by making a public determination on M2Z’s license application.
M2Z’s license application, now pending for over 15 months, will allow the construction of a new, wireless broadband service that will operate in the 2155-2175 MHz band. M2Z, in its application, pledges to provide a free, fast, and family friendly wireless broadband service throughout the U.S.
“M2Z has been very patient on behalf of the millions of Americans who would benefit from our proposed service,” said Milo Medin, M2Z’s Chairman. “It took the FCC nine months to seek comment on our application, which is as long as it took the Commission to decide the largest telecommunications merger in history, the BellSouth/AT&T merger. Not only is it the law, but it is commonsense to give license applications that increase competition at least the same treatment as license transfer applications for mega mergers that lessen competition.”
The primary goals of Section 7 of the Telecommunications Act are to:
- Encourage the availability of new technology and services to the public.
- Prevent the Commission (FCC) from “hampering the development of new services.
- Allow the forces of competition and technological growth to bring many new services to consumers.
M2Z quotes the FCC as previously determining Section 7 to create “a presumption that new services are in the public interest.” Which, in my opinion, means that the FCC thinks Americans simply don’t know what they want, or what is in their best interest.
“Incumbent carriers,” as quoted by M2Z, such as AT&T and Verizon don’t want the competition from M2Z, but would rather prevent the California based company from entering the new market.
Related Posts:
