March 7, 2013

A Canadian family from British Columbia received a surprising notice in the mail this week. Matt Buie opened his phone bill and found his charges for January totaled $22,000. The family had taken a vacation to Mexico in January, and the extraordinary bill represented roaming fees–fees charged by cell-phone carriers when customers use their cell phones outside the carrier’s coverage area. Roaming fees can be several times the amounts that would be charged for the same usage within the coverage area.

The technology firm Apple Inc. has engineered a setting to temporarily turn off data roaming on its iPhone to avoid this very problem. Buie had in fact turned off roaming on his iPhone before leaving Canada. However, his son–confined to a hotel room with a severe sunburn–changed the setting and used the smartphone to entertain himself. The $22,000 bill represents three days of one bored 11-year-old streaming videos and games in Mexico.

Using your smartphone outside your coverage area can be hazardous to your bank account. (© Gary Hershorn, Reuters/Landov)

Roaming data fees are difficult to assess, as people rarely have any idea of how much data they are using when they access the Internet, read e-mail, or watch videos on their phone. The European Union (EU) passed a law in 2009 that limits roaming data charges within the EU to 50 euros (about $65 U.S.).

In the United States, all major phone companies have formed an agreement with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that, by April 2013, they will send warnings via text messaging to customers who have reached the limit on their voice, messaging, or data plan in a given month.  This law will apply to both domestic and international usage.

Canada has no such law. So, Matt Buie is currently attempting to negotiate his $22,000 phone bill down to some reasonable level. No word on the status of his son’s allowance.

Additional World Book articles:

• Telephone
• The Second Wireless Revolution (a special report)

December 3, 2012

Today marked the 20th anniversary of a cornerstone of modern communication: text messaging. The first text—or SMS (short for short messaging service)—was sent by a 22-year-old British engineer named Neil Papworth in 1992. He sent it to Richard Jarvis, a colleague at Vodafone, the company that was developing SMS technology. The text read “Merry Christmas.”

Texts are associated with cell phones because the messages travel over the cell phone network. But in 1992, cell phones lacked any way to type letters. Thus, Papworth typed the historic text on a computer. The computer fed into Vodafone’s GSM (Global System for Mobile communications) cell phone network. Richard Jarvis received the message on an Orbitel 901 cell phone.

A young woman types text messages into a mobile phone in this photograph. People often exchange such brief messages when talking on the phone would be rude or inconvenient. (© Dreamstime)

Jarvis’s laptop-sized Orbitel 901, with its tiny gray screen and long, spiraling cord, might be confused for an ancient relic of a bygone civilization compared with the sleek smartphones of today. The lightning-fast evolution and miniaturization of cell phones since 1992 parallels the explosive growth of text messaging. Today, people around the world send trillions of texts each year. Along with such Internet-based communication as instant messaging and the social network website Twitter, text messaging has helped make short, typed messages a part of everyday life.

Additional World Book articles:

• Cyberbullying
• Freedom of speech
• Constant Comment: What’s All the Twitter About? (a Special Report)
  

Jan 20, 2012

Congressional leaders have indefinitely postponed a vote on anti-piracy legislation just two days after major Internet companies staged an online protest against passage of the Protect Intellectual Property Act (PIPA) in the Senate and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the House.

Thousands of Internet sites “went dark,” that is, took themselves offline, on January 18 to protest the Internet anti-piracy legislation then being debated by Congress. The websites displayed only a critical summary of the two bills, instead of their usual content, and urged website visitors to contact their congressional representatives. The bills would have imposed harsh measures on websites that were found to distribute or link to copyrighted material. Faster broadband networks combined with fast, powerful computers have made it easier to download and stream music, movies, and television shows. The bills were strongly supported by the Motion Picture Association of America and other media companies, which have poured millions of dollars into lobbying for them. Such companies claim that online piracy–that is, the illegal sharing or distributing of copyrighted material–is rampant on the Internet and harms content producers’ ability to make profits.

The bills provoked a major backlash. Critics, including the administration of President Barack Obama and powerful Internet companies, charged that the bills would grant overly broad power to media companies and could enable censorship. Critics took particular issue with the bills’ DNS (Domain Name System) filtering provisions, which could remove offending websites from the Internet’s directory. They also claimed that the legislation would have hampered growth, innovation, and investment and curtail the First Amendment right of free speech.

Additional World Book articles:

• Intellectual property
• Internet, Copyright, and You (A Special Report)
• Back in Time 2000 (Popular music)
• Back in Time 2007 (Popular music)

Jan. 18, 2012

Thousands of Internet sites “went dark,” that is, took themselves offline, today to protest Internet anti-piracy legislation being debated by the U.S. Congress. The websites displayed only a critical summary of the two bills–Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and Protect Intellectual Property Act (PIPA)–instead of their usual content and urged website visitors to contact their congressional representatives. The bills, if passed, would impose harsh measures on websites that are found to distribute or link to copyrighted material. Faster broadband networks combined with fast, powerful computers have made it easier to download and stream music, movies, and television shows. The bills were strongly supported by the Motion Picture Association of America and other media companies, which have poured millions of dollars into lobbying for it. Such companies claim that online piracy–that is, the illegal sharing or distributing of copyrighted material–is rampant on the Internet and harms content producers’ ability to make profits.

Under the legislation, the U.S. Department of Justice and content owners could seek court orders against any website accused of “enabling or facilitating” piracy. Such U.S.-based search engines as Google Inc. and Yahoo! Inc. would also be forbidden to direct users to sites that distribute pirated materials.

The Internet makes possible communication that reaches around the world. In this photograph, Buddhist monks access the Internet from laptop computers and mobile phones at an Internet cafe in India. People everywhere use the Internet to research, shop, watch television, play games, and talk with friends. © Gianni Muratore, Alamy Images

The bills have, however, provoked a backlash. Critics, including the administration of President Barack Obama and powerful Internet companies, charged that the bills would grant overly broad power to media companies and could enable censorship. Critics took particular issue with the bills’ DNS (Domain Name System) filtering provisions, which could remove offending websites from the Internet’s directory. They also claimed that the legislation would hamper growth, innovation, and investment and curtail the First Amendment right of free speech. Congressional supporters of SOPA and PIPA said they would remove DNS filtering provisions from the bills but still try to pass their other provisions.

Additional World Book articles:

• Intellectual property
• Internet, Copyright, and You (A Special Report)
• Back in Time 2000 (Popular music)
• Back in Time 2007 (Popular music)