About Scott Cleland
You are here
January 2011
Why FCC's Net Regs Need Administration/Congressional Regulatory Review
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2011-01-03 12:02To promote "America's free market," President Obama today ordered a government-wide review of regulations that "make our economy less competitive," in order to take us "toward a 21st century regulatory system."
Here is the case for why the FCC's December Open Internet order deserves to be atop of the Administration's regulations to review for abolition.
- (This regulatory review analysis is also highly relevant and applicable to Congress' review of the FCC order under the Congressional Review Act.)
First, the FCC's new Internet regulations violate the President's goal of a "21st century regulatory system" by applying "outdated" 19th century common carrier regulatory thinking and approaches to the previously un-regulated, and flourishing 21st century Internet. (Para 68)
Second, the FCC rules violate the President's goal of avoiding "excessive, inconsistent, and redundant regulation."
Why Google-ITA is like Microsoft-Intuit 1995
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2011-01-19 16:51A helpful way to understand and put in perspective Google's proposed purchase of ITA Software, the dominant provider of flight search technology, is to identify Google-ITA's best historical and logical analog. That would be Microsoft's 1995 proposed purchase of Intuit-Quicken, the then dominant provider of financial software technology. That transaction was blocked by the DOJ as anti-competitive and was a key precursor decision to the DOJ's ultimate decision to sue Microsoft in 1998 for monopolization under the Sherman Act.
The reason so many people ask: "Is Google the next Microsoft?" is because the analogy is so apt.
First, in over thirty years, Microsoft is the only major company other than Google to establish a national monopoly via technology, generate broad serious antitrust complaints, and attract a Sherman Act anti-monopolization case from the DOJ.
Second, Google-ITA is very similar to Microsoft-Intuit as both attempted to leverage their horizontal industry dominance vertically into a non-tech market vertical of the economy, i.e. Microsoft into personal finance software and Google into travel search software.
Why Verizon Wins Appeal of FCC's Net Regs
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2011-01-20 17:54Top Ten:
Verizon is highly likely to win its appeal of the FCC's December Open Internet order, because the FCC's order is likely to deeply and broadly offend the legal sensibilities of the Appeals Court, just like the FCC offended the DC Appeals Court's sensibilities when it punished Comcast for violating a regulation that did not exist.
- The Court responded to that FCC injustice last April by ruling in its Comcast vs. the FCC decision that the FCC had no authority to regulate broadband or the Internet.
To understand the most likely outcome here, it is critical to cut through the FCC's claims, assertions, and arguments, and focus on the big picture context of what the FCC is actually doing in this Open Internet Order, i.e. what is the effect of the FCC's decision and process on the rule of law. That is what matters most to the Court.
Larry Page's Biggest Challenges as Google CEO
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Sun, 2011-01-23 17:07Larry Page is very different from Eric Schmidt, consequently he will be a completely different Google CEO.
- Mr. Page is the internal hardliner and the main driving force behind Google, providing the uber-ambition, the "open" philosophy/ideology zeal, the passion-for-innovation, and the impatient, aggressive take-no-prisoners approach to most everything Google does.
- Mr. Page has always been the penultimate power, final decision-maker and driving force inside Google behind the scenes.
- Mr. Schmidt has been the co-founders' public face and very able implementer and businessman.
The biggest difference people will notice will be external relations.
First, Schmidt and Page are polar opposites when it comes to external relations.
Welcome to the FCC-Centric Internet
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2011-01-25 10:04Welcome to the FCC-centric Internet, where all those with Internet disputes and problems go for resolution and justice.
Today the Washington Post heralds the FCC's New Internet Order in its article: "Net Neutrality Complaints Pile Up."
- Tellingly, after six years of the FCC handling only two formal net neutrality complaints, now that the FCC has unilaterally asserted sweeping authority to regulate the Internet in its Open Internet order, "net neutrality complaints pile up."
- What has changed?
- After six years of near universal perfect behavior respecting the FCC's broadband policy statement, has the industry decided to go rogue right when the FCC has installed itself as King over the Internet realm?
- Or are opportunists coming out of the woodwork recognizing that the FCC's rules assume broadband providers are guilty of whatever charge they trump up, until they prove themselves innocent to the FCC?
Make no mistake, the Internet is changing before our eyes.
The FCC's Internet regulation has short-circuited all three of the core and long-proven Internet mechanisms for resolving disputes and problems: competition, negotiation, and collaboration.
FCC's Net Regs in Conflict with President's Pledges
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2011-01-26 10:47The FCC's Open Internet order should be ripe for review and "fixing" given President Obama's pledge in his SOTU speech last night:
- "To reduce barriers to growth and investment, I've ordered a review of government regulations. When we find rules that put an unnecessary burden on business, we will fix them."
Clearly the FCC's preemptive bans, restrictions and economic/price regulation of competitive broadband providers based on scant and weak evidence of any real problem to solve, obviously place "an unnecessary burden on business" and the Administration should "fix them."
As I explained in my previous detailed post: "Why FCC's Net Regs Need Administration/Congressional Regulatory Review," the FCC's Open Internet order violates the President's pledge for regulations to:
Google Sides with Wikileaks
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2011-01-26 11:51It is stunning that Google's decision to side with Julian Assange's Wikileaks and make all the stolen secret, private and proprietary Wikileaks information universally accessible to the world via Google search, has gotten virtually no media attention, given the:
- International carnage and controversy caused by Wikileaks reprehensible actions;
- Media's broad coverage of Wikileaks;
- Google's serial disrespect for others as evidenced by its serial privacy, IP, cybersecurity, and antitrust problems around the world that have been broadly covered by the media; and
- Google is the world's leading source for accessing Wikileaks secret, private and proprietary information.
When Google's Acting CEO Eric Schmidt told the DLD media conference in Munich (as reported by Reuters):
Skyhook Wireless is Google's Netscape -- Googleopoly VII: Monopolizing Location Services
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Sun, 2011-01-30 17:57Skyhook Wireless' anticompetitive complaints are to Google's antitrust problems what Netscape's complaints were to DOJ's anti-monopolization case against Microsoft -- i.e. the most blatant, understandable, and strategically-important example of abusing monopoly power to monopolize a linchpin technology in order to extend the monopoly into other strategic markets.
- Simply, Skyhook Wireless is the poster child victim of Google monopoly abuse.
I. Why is Skyhook-Google analogous to Netscape-Microsoft ?
Of all the many claims of anti-competitive behavior against Google that I have reviewed over the last four years, I believe the Skyhook complaints are the charges that Google should be most worried about and that the DOJ/EU should be most interested in.
