You are here

Why Chairmen Upton/Walden Plan a Communications Act Update – Daily Caller Op-ed

Please don’t miss my latest Daily Caller op-ed “Why Chairmen Upton/Walden Plan a Communications Act Update” – here.

The op-ed provides a foundational answer to both:

  • Chairman Upton/Walden’s organizing question: “…is this working for today’s communications marketplace?” and
  • Representative Dingell’s core question: What is the need for change?

This is Part 21 of my Obsolete Communications Law Series.

***

FYI: See additional background below: two key PowerPoint presentations & my Obsolete Communications Law Series.

PowerPoint: Modern Beats Obsolete in Spurring Economic Growth & Innovation: Modernize Obsolete Communications Law & Spectrum Management

Outline:

Obsolete Law & Regulation

  • What makes it obsolete?
  • FCC regulation is an historical anomaly
  • How did this anomaly happen?
  • Law ignores five technology changes
  • Five ways law has held America back
  • From monopoly to competitive economics
  • What’s the harm from obsolete law?

Obsolete Spectrum Management

  • Spectrum management is an historical anomaly
  • Spectrum is a Resource management outlier
  • Spectrum is the worst managed resource
  • Obvious waste of government spectrum
  • How did this anomaly happen?
  • Why is U.S. spectrum management so dysfunctional?

Conclusions

Recommendations

PowerPoint: A Modern Vision for the FCC: How the FCC Can Modernize its Policy Approaches for the 21st Century

Outline:

Defining Modern vs. Nostalgist Visions

Problems

  • America’s biggest 21st century communications problems
  • The FCC’s biggest 21st century problems
  • The FCC’s worst nostalgist tendencies
  • The FCC’s obsolete public interest test

Solutions

  • A modern competition policy
  • A modern public interest test

Recommendation: A modern FCC policy agenda  

Obsolete Communications Law Research Series

Part 1: Obsolete communications law stifles innovation, harms consumers [5-2-12]

Part 2: The FCC's Public Interest Test Problem [5-21-12]

Part 3: FCC Special Access: Communications Obsolete-ism vs. Modernism [6-8-12]

Part 4: Obsolete Analysis Will Doom DOJ's Antitrust Probe of Cable [6-14-12]

Part 5: Why U.S. Communications Law is Obsolete [6-25-12]

Part 6: FCC's Slippery Slope to Regulating Content, Speech, and the Press [7-19-12]

Part 7: FCC's Over-Reliance on Obsolete Law [7-26-12]

Part 8: Google Fiber: Modern Technology, But Obsolete Policy Thinking [7-30-12]

Part 9: FCC Showcases Its Growing Obsolescence [8-23-12]

Part 10: The FCC's 1887 Railroad Regulation Mindset [8-29-12]

Part 11: U.S. Government's Obsolete and Wasteful Spectrum Hoarding and Rationing [9-7-12]

Part 12: U.S. Falling Behind the World in Auctioning Broadband Spectrum [9-24-12]

Part 13: U.S. Government's Obsolete & Dysfunctional Spectrum Management [10-5-12]

Part 14: A Welcome Catalyst for Modernizing Obsolete Communications Law [11-9-12]

Part 15: Google Fiber's Avoidance of Phone Service Makes Case for Obsolete Law [12-7-12]

Part 16: Professor Crawford's Obsolete Public Utility Thinking for Broadband [1-11-13]

Part 17: ITU in Search of Relevance in the Internet Age [2-19-13]

Part 18: Why IP Interconnection Would Break the Internet [3-15-13]

Part 19: 1G Government in a 4G World [7-16-13]

Part 20: Real vs. Contrived "Modern" FCC Policy Thinking [10-14-13]

 

Q&A One Pager Debunking Net Neutrality Myths