Media Experiences 2 Go

The title of this post is probably a little strong, but it will be interesting to see what happens in the wake of the petition by Skype to have the FCC force wireless operators to loosen up. Specifically, Skype doesn’t want operators to be able to control what hardware and software can connect to their networks. Gee, seems like we were just talking about this.

The crux of Skype’s legal argument appears to rest on the 1968 Carterfone decision. Landline networks have been subjected to regulations of this sort for decades, and Skype thinks wireless should follow the same rules.

As I’ve said before, there are reasons for allowing network operators to preserve some controls, but we’re going to see an increasing number of challenges to what the limits of those controls should be. Aside from some of the obviously unhelpful practices carriers have maintained (taking a 40-50% cut from charity SMS fundraising campaigns, for example), the issue is going to rear its head again because more and more devices and applications are connecting to each other via the Internet.

I don’t know what the ultimate resolution will be, but I’m sure it will rest on some kind of agreement between operators (both the wired and wireless kind) and application and device makers about how bandwidth is managed and paid for. Operators will argue that they’ve footed the bill for the network backbone. And they’re right. But I don’t think they’ll be able to stem the tide of innovative companies and eager consumers looking to do more with the network access they have.

By the way, Ars Technica covered this Skype story specifically, but also had a fantastic article earlier in the month (pre-Skype-petition) on a paper by Columbia professor Tim Wu discussing whether wireless carriers should be a bit freer with their networks.