Ebay

Please don’t miss my latest Daily Caller op-ed “The FCC Is Not Neutral.”

• It explains why the FCC’s partisan arbitrariness may be the downfall of its Title II net neutrality rules in court.

***

FCC Open Internet Order Series

Part 1: The Many Vulnerabilities of an Open Internet [9-24-09]

Please don’t miss my latest Daily Caller op-ed “FCC Internet Utility Regulation Is a Really Stupid Idea”

***

FCC Open Internet Order Series

Part 1: The Many Vulnerabilities of an Open Internet [9-24-09]

Part 2: Why FCC proposed net neutrality regs unconstitutional, NPR Online Op-ed [9-24-09]

Please don’t miss my latest Daily Caller op-ed “Net Neutrality Bait & Switch to Title II.”

• It shows how net neutrality and Title II are not the same.

***

FCC Open Internet Order Series 

Part 1: The Many Vulnerabilities of an Open Internet [9-24-09]

Part 2: Why FCC proposed net neutrality regs unconstitutional, NPR Online Op-ed [9-24-09]

Please don’t miss my latest Daily Caller op-ed “Testing the FCC’s Net Neutrality Political Calculus.”

• It explains how the FCC is risking the proverbial “bird in the hand” to grasp for the elusive “two birds in the bush,” and in doing so is very likely to end up with no net neutrality authority long term.    

***

FCC Open Internet Order Series 

Part 1: The Many Vulnerabilities of an Open Internet [9-24-09]

Please don’t miss my latest Daily Caller op-ed “The FCC’s De-Americanization of the Internet.”

It explains how the FCC’s expected U-turn on Title II affects digital free trade by contrasting the very different Clinton-Net and Obama-Net visions for the Internet.  

***

FCC Open Internet Order Series 

Part 1: The Many Vulnerabilities of an Open Internet [9-24-09]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                           

January 23, 2015      Contact:  Scott Cleland 703-217-2407

FCC Should Lead by Example and Be Publicly Open & Transparent about its Internet Proposal

Why Block or Throttle Public Openness & Transparency in a FCC Open Internet Order Vote?

WASHINGTON D.C. – The following may be attributed to Scott Cleland, Chairman of NetCompetition:

Please don’t miss my latest Daily Caller op-ed “Why the FCC Needs Congress.”

While the FCC may imagine it does not need any authority from this Congress to legally enforce an Open Internet, it does need the Congress legally, operationally and politically.  

***

FCC Open Internet Order Series

Part 1: The Many Vulnerabilities of an Open Internet [9-24-09]

Current attention on the “tree” of the FCC’s pending Open Internet Order vote on net neutrality, has many “missing the forest” of additional serious problems with outdated 1934 communications law.   

To put net neutrality in the context of all the legal authority obsolescence problems faced by the FCC, please don’t miss this eye-opening one-page summary (here and below) of my latest white paper, “The Need for Modernizing Communications Law for American Consumers.”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                           

January 16, 2015

Contact:  Scott Cleland 703-217-2407

The FCC Should Defer to an Engaged Congress to Best Resolve its Real Internet Authority Gaps

There is No Legitimate Policy/Process Reason Why FCC Can’t Wait a Reasonable Period of Time to Seek a Permanent Bipartisan Congressional Solution Rather than the FCC’s 0-2 Legal Record

WASHINGTON D.C. – The following may be attributed to Scott Cleland, Chairman of NetCompetition:

Is the new Congress watching?

America’s government-advantaged aristechracy, which enjoys the most favorable taxation, regulation, and law enforcement treatment of any American industry by far, has the hubris to lobby the FCC for billions of dollars in implicit economic subsidies from consumers via the imposition of maximal FCC Title II regulation, taxation and law enforcement of ISPs.  

Consider the Internet Association’s Title II position.

In November, the Internet Association’s President Michael Beckerman said: “Using Title II authority, along with the right set of enforceable rules… would establish the strong net neutrality protections Internet users require.”