Remember when Google offered the FCC $4.6 Billion to require the winners of the 700 Mhz auction to follow four "openness" principles? Seems like the CTIA (Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association) has something to say:

"The veil has been lifted. Google's letter to the FCC this morning highlights the Internet giant's scheme to have the 700 MHz auction rigged with special conditions in its favor. If Google is willing to commit almost $5 billion dollars for spectrum that it wants encumbered with various requirements, then let it win that spectrum in a competitive auction and choose that business model. Google and its allies, with their collective market capitalization approaching half a trillion dollars, don't need a government handout at taxpayers' expense. The competitive wireless industry welcomes all new entrants, but no company should be able to buy a custom-fit government regulation that suits their particular business plan. Consumers should decide if they're right, not the federal government".

Real nice. Obviously the CTIA went through the trouble of carefully choosing the words ofthe statement. The calculated use of phrases like "the veil has been lifted" and words like "rigged" are meant to demonize Google' initiative and portray the company as a financial heavyweight trying to fix the game in its favor.

While I question Google's use of $4.6 billion as an incentive/publicity stunt, I like the intentions behind it. I really wonder why the CTIA, who represent service providers, is taking an aggressive stance towards Google. Do they really feel that the "openness" principles threaten the bottom line?

Hardly. If truly open wireless data networks become a reality, if the restrictions existing on today's closed systems disappear, it would lead to more service usage. That's because the possibilities for consumers and service providers will increase, potentially leading to the creation of the next "killer app" that will drive mobile usage in the future.

The only reason I see behind the CTIA's attack is that they're worried about open systems, and how they will limit the service providers' control over their own customers' use of smartphones and PDAs.

What do you think?