There aren’t a lot of details yet on how that $6 billion would be given out, but it doesn’t seem to encompass the tax breaks phone and cable companies were lobbying for. Even so, the wireless industry was cheering Thursday morning because a summary of the spending released by House Democrats calls for the money to be used on “broadband and wireless grants.”

Wireless companies were concerned that the money would be earmarked for cable and phone companies providing fiber to the home.

On Wednesday, an Obama adviser who’s been in charge of the broadband stimulus package indicated that industry and tech expectations about the broadband part of the package had gotten a bit out of control.

“The broadband piece of the Obama agenda is not going to be done solely in the economic recovery package,” said Blair Levin, a telecom analyst and former FCC chief of staff who’s been advising the campaign on how to structure its broadband plan. He was speaking at a tech conference on Capitol Hill.

Read the full article in Wall Street Journal here.

The proposal has been added to a pending auction of the airwaves. The FCC is scheduled to vote on rules for the sale on Dec. 18. Mr. Martin wants the company that buys the airwaves to devote at least 25% of the spectrum to free Internet access for 95% of the country. The no-cost Internet service also would be smut-free for users under 18. Adult users could opt out of the filter blocking pornographic content.

Mr. Martin said Wednesday that he has circulated two versions of the auction item — one with the unlicensed provision and one without — for the other commissioners on the five-member body to review before the meeting. The FCC will vote on only one version, depending on which version the other commissioners prefer, Mr. Martin said.

Mr. Martin wants to sell a nationwide license to the airwaves rather than give the channels to entrepreneurs because he wants to promote free Internet access. By adding a clause that would give away airwaves where there isn’t an Internet network after five years, Mr. Martin hopes that the owner of the channels would have an added incentive to build a network.

Mr. Martin said Wednesday that both versions of the auction item include a “use it or lose it” provision in which the owner of the channels would lose spectrum where there is no Internet access. The owner of the channels would “continue to serve whatever area they’ve built out,” he said.

Read the full story in the Wall Street Journal here.

On Wednesday, Big Blue announced it has signed a $9.6 million contract with International Broadband Electric Communications to bring the technology to rural America where it hopes to deliver high-speed broadband connectivity to millions of people who otherwise wouldn’t be able to get it. IBM and IBEC, which will build and manage the networks, are working with over a dozen electricity cooperatives in seven states, The Wall Street Journal reported.

For years, people have hoped broadband-over-power line technology, or BPL, would allow power companies to become the third alternative in the broadband market, competing against cable operators and telephone companies. But technical limitations and interference issues with local emergency radios and short-wave ham radios have stood in the way of mass adoption.

In recent years, new modulation techniques supported by other technological advances have helped BPL evolve. Most services today are capable of delivering between 512Kbps and 3Mbps of throughput, which is comparable to most DSL offerings.

In rural areas in particular, BPL technology could finally bring high-speed Internet access to people who otherwise couldn’t get it. Traditional phone and cable companies often find it too expensive to deploy new infrastructure to provide service to the far reaches of rural America.

Read the full story in CNET here.

The lawsuit involves a 3-2 decision the FCC handed down in early August that found Comcast’s practices violated so-called net-neutrality principles, and ordered the company to provide more details of its network-management policies within 30 days. The FCC also ordered Comcast to stop by the end of the year blocking traffic related to specific applications, such as file-sharing software that allows users to swap videos.

It was the first time the FCC had found a company in violation of the commission’s net-neutrality principles, which lay out consumers’ Internet rights.

Comcast was widely expected to appeal the FCC’s decision, even though the company wasn’t fined. Comcast says its practice of sometimes slowing Internet traffic on file-sharing networks like BitTorrent is reasonable and necessary to prevent a few heavy bandwidth users from slowing other customers’ service. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals here, doesn’t go into details about the complaint, but company officials have argued that the FCC has authority to bring enforcement actions under formal rules, not principles. While the FCC has stated a position on net neutrality, it hasn’t established formal rules.

Read the full story in ‘The Wall Street Journal’ here.