You are here Sprint
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2013-06-21 15:27
They were so wrong. To justify FCC market intervention, U.S. proponents of EU-style, heavy-handed broadband regulation trumpeted the narrative that the U.S. was falling behind the world in broadband.
The pro-regulation chorus of Free Press, Save the Internet, Public Knowledge, Susan Crawford, the Harvard Berkman Center, et al, sung from the same made-up song sheet that American business was failing and Government needed to take control of broadband networks to restore American leadership and prevent private enterprise from discriminating and censoring Americans free speech.
Now we know how tall a tale these pro-regulation pressure groups were willing to spin to advance their interventionist net neutrality agenda.
Facts are pesky things and the facts show that the U.S. is strongly leading the EU in the broadband race. It is so obvious even top EU officials admit the EU “needs to catch up.”
Let’s review the latest facts.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2013-06-19 16:01
Please see my latest Daily Caller op-ed: "The New U.S. Spectrum Policy Has Big Problems” -- here.
- It critiques the new Presidential Memorandum: “Expanding America’s Leadership in Wireless Innovation.”
- It is also Part 9 of my Government Spectrum Waste, Fraud & Abuse Research Series.
* * * * *
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2013-06-07 15:01
Please see my latest Daily Caller op-ed: "FCC/DOJ’s One Gigahertz Spectrum Charade" -- here.
- It is Part 8 of my Government Spectrum Waste, Fraud & Abuse Research Series.
* * * * *
Government Spectrum Waste Fraud and Abuse Research Series
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Sun, 2013-06-02 18:32
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals 3-0 decision to overturn the FCC in Comcast v. FCC/Tennis Channel spells more trouble for the ultimate legality of the FCC’s Open Internet Order. That decision spotlights that three additional D.C. Circuit Appeals Court’s judges do not agree with the FCC’s reading of the law and the facts concerning lawful network discrimination.
On the margin, this new decision should make Verizon more confident and the FCC less confident in the outcome of Verizon v. FCC.
Overall, I believe Verizon remains more likely than not to prevail in its challenge of the FCC net neutrality regulations in the FCC’s Open Internet Order, because Verizon only needs to prevail with one of its many strong arguments while the FCC must win on all of them.
How is this latest D.C. Circuit decision relevant to the FCC Open Internet order case?
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2013-05-21 18:23
What’s the impact on the Verizon appeal of the Open Internet Order of the Supreme Court’s strong reaffirmation of its Chevron deference standard, in Arlington v. FCC?
I believe Verizon is still more likely than not to prevail on the merits of its appeal, because the FCC’s Open Internet Order is so unambiguously far outside the bounds of the FCC’s statutory authority, that Chevron deference is unlikely to apply.
If the SCOTUS had not strongly reaffirmed Chevron deference, the FCC would have faced an even steeper fight in the Open Internet Order. Despite the SCOTUS decision not being particularly helpful in the specific FCC Open Internet case, it undeniably was very FCC-friendly overall. That’s because it affords the FCC more latitude to exploit the many legally-ambiguous seams of communications law to advance its various regulatory agendas in highly-targeted ways.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2013-05-13 09:05
Please see my latest Daily Caller Op-ed "Wireless Plan Innovation Benefits Consumers & Competition -- here.
- It debunks net neutrality criticism of a reported potential ESPN-wireless pricing experiment.
- It is also Part 15 of my Broadband Internet Pricing Freedom research series.
* * * * *
Broadband Internet Pricing Freedom Research Series
Part 1: Netflix' Glass House Temper Tantrum Over Broadband Usage Fees
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2013-05-07 13:07
Please read my latest Daily Caller Op-ed: "The FCC Transition?" -- here.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2013-05-02 16:10
The CTIA just released its semi-annual statistics on the wireless industry’s performance, and its bad news for all those supposed data-driven, pro-regulation proponents who are in search of evidence or data to justify regulating wireless or wireless spectrum holdings.
The data are more powerful evidence of a competitive wireless industry. Hopefully, this data will nudge the FCC to begrudgingly conclude that the industry is indeed competitive, despite their blinders to the data.
Briefly, the U.S. wireless industry:
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2013-04-22 04:34
Competition is alive and well in the U.S. communications market.
Market forces have produced a barrage of big competitive developments in just a few weeks. Dish’s disruptive $25b bid for Sprint could offer consumers a new choice of a lower-price, faster-speed, all-wireless platform for the first time. Google’s disruptive ongoing expansion of Google Fiber from Kansas City to Austin Texas and Provo Utah signals more and new consumers could increasingly enjoy the choice of a new, much-faster, near-comprehensively-integrated broadband offering. And T-Mobile is disrupting in yet another major way with a new maverick wireless pricing model that offers no contract plans and relatively more a la carte pricing.
These developments are proof positive why competition is so far superior to regulation. Survival is a powerful motivator to disrupt, differentiate and innovate, just as the opportunity for large profit and market leadership are powerful motivators as well.
While regulators slowly fret over how they can solve yesterday’s problems by fiat or opaque subsidy, competition is automatically devising alternative solutions to today’s problems, and inevitably is working on different solutions to tomorrow’s problems.
I. Dish-Sprint
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2013-04-15 14:07
Please see my latest Daily Caller op-ed: "DOJ Joins FCC in Picking Wireless Winners & Losers" -- here.
- It is Part 7 of my Government Spectrum Waste, Fraud & Abuse Research Series.
* * * * *
Government Spectrum Waste Fraud and Abuse Research Series
Part 1: U.S. Government's Obsolete and Wasteful Spectrum Hoarding and Rationing
Pages
|