yesterday's FCC filing by ctia represents a potentially key inflection point in the ongoing net neutrality debate, specifically in the context of ctia's comments on skype's february petition asking the fcc to require wireless carriers to allow consumers the right to attach non-harmful devices of choice to networks of their choice (
see my february post).
restricting myself to the petition's executive summary (
entire ctia petition linked here), and with due (seriously) respect to legitimate carrier concerns - e.g. managing efficiency and security of networks, evolving business models to account for the the commoditization of access, etc. - i gotta say some of the arguments might be a bit of a stretch...
first off, let's recognize that skype's petition speaks for a broader range of wireless industry players who, for customer sensitivity or other reasons, are mum on the issue. so, in other words, it may be a bit much to say that the petition is entirely self-serving, e.g. "seeking to apply monopoly regulation to vibrantly competitive wireless markets in an attempt to use regulation to facilitate Skype’s service and specific business model." and, while ctia is absolutely correct in saying "this is not a market which is broken" (and as such should not be victim to frivolous regulatory change), it might be a bit hyperbolic to suggest that "the re-regulation that Skype calls for would seriously impair wireless carriers’ ability to meet the demands of consumers."
the ctia petition executive summary makes repeated and appropriate reference to the competitiveness of the u.s. wireless industry, but might slightly undermine the credibility of ths point suggesting "wireless consumers have their choice of about 700 handsets with differing features, form factors, and operating systems." whle perhaps theoretically true, it is hardly the case in practice - walk into any carrier store...
ctia is right when it says "the u.s. mobile wireless industry’s success has been made possible, in part, by an environment of minimal regulatory intervention," but, in my humble opinion, skype is not "asking the FCC to upend a regulatory model that has worked so well to date." rather skype is asking the regulator to review and apply, as appropriate, decades-old policy (carterfone) that secures the right of telecommunications choice for american consumers.
let's face it, for a variety of reasons, u.s. consumers do not have the choice of mobile devices that consumers in other markets take for granted. and, u.s. consumers do not have the freedom in the untethered internet enviornment that they enjoy in the fixed internet world. is there a market failure that demands regulatory intervention as a fix? perhaps not. but the potential is real. the skype petition has prompted a dialogue that every u.s. consumer should value, a spotlight, a non-regulatory check as it were, on market behavior. let us hope that the debate goes on, to ensure, in ctia's words, that we protect "the true demands and interests of wireless consumers."
for whatever it may be worth, while each allows for mobile device access/use, they are all still primarily optimized for the PC experience, and, each requires (naturally) some level of ongoing "active" engagement (input) by the user. "passive presence" and more mobile-optimization will almost certainly come with the introduction and mainstreaming of integrated gps handhelds. until then, while cute and fun, these services are somewhat limited in their location-based promise. mobility, after all, is the ultimate extension of the web2.0 experience - indeed, mobility completes it.
...where better to stop to revel in the hoyas trouncing cincy. 
