Feeds

Ofcom boss threatens nuclear option on 4G squabble

Agree on auction or I'll sic the politicians on you

Beginner's guide to SSL certificates

The head of the UK's communications regulator has threatened to bring in the politicians if network operators continue to squabble over next year's mega-auction of 800MHz and 2.6GHz bands.

We're still waiting to see what form that auction will take; Ofcom's first consultation on the subject produced such a storm of responses that it was forced to postpone the autumn publication of a proposed auction format. A new consultation on that proposal is now expected by the end of they year, but Ofcom's chief executive Ed Richards has preempted the widely expected legal challenges by threatening to hand control back to the politicians if the network operators derail the sell-off.

The operators all claim they want the auction to go ahead, publicly at least, but each of them has vested interests in how the auction is structured, and several have made it clear they're prepared to take court action to protect those interests.

In summary: O2 and Vodafone have lovely spectrum at 900MHz, which they were given when mobile networks were new and aren't prepared to give it up.

T-Mobile and Orange were, similarly, given spectrum at 1800MHz, but despite merging their holdings into Everything Everywhere, they want O2 and Vodafone locked out of bidding for 800MHz unless they give up some 900MHz goodness. O2 and Vodafone contend that EE has too much spectrum anyway so should be forced to sell some. Three, who arrived too late to be part of the great spectrum giveaway, wants restitution in the form of extra bidding rights or some free frequencies.

BT, meanwhile, sits on the sidelines shouting that any attempt to impose coverage requirements on specific lumps of spectrum would amount of an illegal state subsidy, and is prepared to stand up in court to say so.

Whose side is Ofcom on?

In public, the operators accuse Ofcom of timidity: each of them wants the regulator to stand up to their rivals and concede to their own demands - which are, of course, quite reasonable. After all, the frequencies up for grabs can be used for 4G services and include parts of the spectrum used by analogue TV, which is gradually being switched off.

"It has been very disappointing to witness the extent to which the incumbent mobile operators have chosen to entangle this process in litigation or threats of litigation," says Ed Richards in his speech to the European Competitive Telecommunications Association Regulatory Conference.

"When litigation becomes essentially strategic rather than based on objective grounds, and when it has the effect of holding back innovation and hampering growth, it is legitimate to ask whether the overall legislative framework fully supports the public interest in this vital area."

Ofcom can't change the legislative framework, the regulator's work is limited to what the government (the Ministry of Fun in particular) asks it to do. Ofcom can't make laws to compel operators to accept conditions on the mega-auction, but it can go back to ministers and ask for such laws to be enacted, and as Richards points out:

I am sure legislators would be all too willing to accept an argument which returns power in such matters to politicians, in the light of the apparent inability of the current model to make timely decisions where the national interest is at stake.

Ofcom is still planning to publish a new consultation on the mega-auction by the end of the year, and is constantly negotiating with the network operators in preparing that document. The fact that the regulator's boss is publicly threatening to set the politicians on those operators is not a sign that the negotiations are going well.

The speech [PDF, surprising pugilistic] goes on to talk about potential restructuring of the entire sub-1GHz band, including the possibility of giving up (or moving) broadcast television and the essential role played by government (and regulator) in forcing more efficient use of radio spectrum, including making tough decisions about mitigation technologies and spectrum allocations.

Ofcom may well be growing a set of balls, just as the network operators asked, but a bellicose regulator prepared to call in political might may not prove to be what the operators actually wanted. ®

Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops

More from The Register

next story
Crouching tiger, FAST ASLEEP dragon: Smugglers can't shift iPhone 6s
China's grey market reports 'sluggish' sales of Apple mobe
Sea-Me-We 5 construction starts
New sub cable to go live 2016
EE coughs to BROKEN data usage metrics BLUNDER that short-changes customers
Carrier apologises for 'inflated' measurements cockup
Comcast: Help, help, FCC. Netflix and pals are EXTORTIONISTS
The others guys are being mean so therefore ... monopoly all good, yeah?
Surprise: if you work from home you need the Internet
Buffer-rage sends Aussies out to experience road rage
EE buys 58 Phones 4u stores for £2.5m after picking over carcass
Operator says it will safeguard 359 jobs, plans lick of paint
MOST iPhone strokers SPURN iOS 8: iOS 7 'un-updatening' in 5...4...
Guess they don't like our battery-draining update?
prev story

Whitepapers

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk
A single remote control platform for user support is be key to providing an efficient helpdesk. Retain full control over the way in which screen and keystroke data is transmitted.
Intelligent flash storage arrays
Tegile Intelligent Storage Arrays with IntelliFlash helps IT boost storage utilization and effciency while delivering unmatched storage savings and performance.
Beginner's guide to SSL certificates
De-mystify the technology involved and give you the information you need to make the best decision when considering your online security options.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.
Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops
Balancing user privacy and privileged access, in accordance with compliance frameworks and legislation. Evaluating any potential remote control choice.