Critics See NTIA Investigation of IoT as Waste of Time
Some industry observers question whether the NTIA’s request for comments on government policies to promote IoT is likely to have much effect on policy. Early filings made available by commenters largely track arguments that have been made many times in other forums (see 1606030045). Many of the commenters advised the NTIA the best course is for the government to avoid additional regulation. NTIA posted comments late Monday.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
Several former FCC officials said the request for comments could be a waste of time, especially late in the administration. Public interest groups, including Common Cause, Free Press, New America and Public Knowledge declined to comment. NTIA also didn’t comment. “It's great that the NTIA is interested in the topic, but this proceeding is more an effort of duplication than edification,” said Roger Entner, analyst at Recon Analytics. “The good news is that the respective parties just had to copy and paste large parts of their previous filings for this one.”
Former FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell said there's some reason in the NTIA seeking comment in the last year of the Obama administration. "Historically, lame-duck administrations will continue to ask for comment on a variety of topics even in the twilight of ​their second terms,” said McDowell, now at Wiley Rein. “They do this to set the table for the next administration and to show that they are still thoughtful and inquisitive. We are only at the beginning of the IoT frontier, and they will be able to say that they were thinking about it and helping shape its sunrise."
Doug Brake, telecom policy analyst at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, also said the NTIA request is likely aimed at providing information for the next administration. “IoT is a fast-changing area of tech with a real opportunity for good policy to help the area flourish, “ he said. “Areas like cybersecurity and procurement policies are obvious. Its more general information gathering than specific questions for specific policy actions, so understandable that folks are just tossing in their latest IoT thoughts. But still, good governance to get the current lay of the land. Better deliberate than rash.”
Sledge Hammer Regulation Feared
IoT is a “multifaceted jewel with the potential to transform business and society in ways we can only imagine,” said Adonis Hoffman, chairman of Business in the Public Interest and former aide to FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn. “The prospect of sledge-hammer regulation is frightening, especially at such a nascent stage. I would hope to see a policy approach that fosters innovation and self-regulation. That would be a mandate for Congress, I would think."
But Tom Struble, policy counsel at TechFreedom, said the group isn't overly concerned about the NTIA request for comments. “This is not a case where, as with recent proceedings at the FCC, the agency already seems to have a policy preference in mind and is simply working backward and going through the motions in order to build a record to support its preference in a way that comports with the APA [Administrative Procedure Act],” he said. “Here, it seems like NTIA is truly just asking open-ended questions about the proper role, if any, for the federal government in regulating IoT going forward, and it’s perfectly reasonable to think that no prescriptive regulations will come out of this. That would be our ideal outcome, but, of course, it’s more likely that at least one federal agency, if not more, will have regulatory oversight over IoT.”
TechFreedom didn’t file comments, but generally agrees with those filed by CTA, CTIA and Mobile Future, which argue against regulation, Struble said. "Regulatory intervention at this stage, even if done with the best intentions in mind … may significantly warp the market for IoT and result in significant welfare-enhancing IoT technologies and applications" going undeveloped, he said.
The biggest role NTIA can play on IoT is “to redouble its efforts to free up more of the vast horde of essential radio spectrum currently sitting idle or underutilized by the federal government itself,” emailed Larry Downes of the Georgetown Center for Business and Public Policy. “There was no need to solicit ‘broad input’ to determine the ‘potential benefits’ of the technology, nor, ominously, ‘what role, if any, the U.S. Government should play in this area,’” Downes said.
Free State Foundation President Randolph May said he's reluctant to criticize an information gathering effort so early in the process. “In the case of IoT, there is obviously no basis now to be conjuring up new regulatory paradigms when the regulations in place are already sufficient to address any problems or may need to just be relaxed to accommodate new emerging services,” he said. “It’s important to resist the urge to adopt new regulations in the absence of identified consumer harms.”