Free WLANs Controversy

After I read the issue in the book, I had an opinion right away about having free internet. I realize there are problems with it, but so many positive things come from it like providing the internet to people who can’t normally afford it and saving public schools money. I’m going to research how broadband and wireless service providers are reacting to this new technology. I don’t believe they have a right to debate something that is completely legal. I understand Napster had to deal with musicians and it was technically ‘stealing’, but this Free WLAN doesn’t involve other people’s life work. Broadband service providers don’t own the internet. I don’t believe anyone has rights to the internet; it’s just access to information. We shouldn’t be charged for it. Since I stated my opinion, I will now state the facts.

Pros of Free WLANs (Computer Concepts, pg. 272):

• Inexpensive and simple to set up an antenna
• Can connect to any available Wi-Fi network
• Libraries can offer internet access to people in low-income areas
• Local schools could get wired without exorbitant cabling expenses
• Parents, kids, and grandparents, as well as corporate executives could exchange e-mail and instant messages from locations that include the kitchen table, the corner coffee shop, and the Little League field
• More than one user per household can share the connection

Threat to wireless service providers

(website: http://www.rpoptions.com/hottopics?9):

“Wi-Fi is faster and cheaper than 3G wireless giving it the real potential to steal share from the already smaller than expected market for 3G services. The sole value-add of 3G is the lack of geographic restrictions. 3G wireless, unlike Wi-Fi, can be accessed at any place within the geographic reach of your provider (or its roaming partners). But do consumers really need wireless access to be always on? With hubs in office buildings, apartment complexes, train stations, airports, coffee shops and restaurants, Wi-Fi users may not be at any real disadvantage with respect to geographic scope of service.”

Their reaction:

“To respond to this threat, many wireless providers, some of whom already spent billions building 3G infrastructure, are incorporating Wi-Fi capabilities into their networks. The goal is to provide their customers the best of both worlds; coverage and speed in a bundled package, enabling differentiation from those only able to supply Wi-Fi services.”.

Threat to broadband service providers (http://www.rpoptions.com/hottopics?9):

“Not only does Wi-Fi present a clear and present threat to wireless providers, Telcos who have invested in building wireline broadband capabilities are also potentially in danger. The Wi-Fi technology enables individuals to share broadband capacity with each other, reducing the requirements for individual connections. As homes and apartment blocks introduce Wi-Fi technology, each apartment, and workstation will no longer require a dedicated connection point. This shift could dramatically reduce the demand for supplemental wireline connections, affecting the top line of every Telco offering broadband services.”

Their reaction:

“Some Telcos have responded to this by lobbying government to enact regulations which would slow the adoption of Wi-Fi. Their goal is to increase barriers to entry and delay the change by attempting to have government communications agencies create laws to force Wi-Fi to meet regulatory requirements for security of signals and quality of service. This tactic may delay the widespread adoption of Wi-Fi,”

The links provided on infoweb didn’t have any articles about the reaction of commercial service providers and a few of the links didn’t work, so I had to research it on my own. A lot of websites came up saying how many major cities (including Philadelphia, San Francisco and New York) are jumping on the free Wi-Fi bandwagon, The articles reported on how it will help low-income neighborhoods. I think every city should start this Free WLAN project and give people with less income the same opportunity more fortunate people have.