Submitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2007-06-14 11:11
The cover story in the Wall Street Journal today "A fight over what you can do with your cellphone; Handset makers push free features for which carriers pay for" was obviously perfectly-timed and placed by open access/net neutrality proponents trying to influence the Senate Commerce Committee hearing today on the FCC's 700 MHz auction.
What the article ignores is the broader and essential context of this issue and debate.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2007-06-13 22:11
I was glad to see a heavyweight group of economists systematically debunk Frontline's economic gymnastics to try and justify a sweetheart spectrum deal for Frontline at the expense of the American taxpayer.
Remember, there is nothing "neutral" about trying to shaft the American taxpayer!
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2007-06-13 10:48
It is very rare when I feel compelled to praise the liberal New York Times editorial board for one of its editorial positions, but to be fair, I must when they get an issue dead right.
George Orwell's seminal book "1984" ingrained the totalitarian metaphorical threat of "Big Brother" in the world's thinking and lexicon.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2007-06-12 17:53
Public interest groups supportive of net neutrality like Common Cause and The Maine Civil Liberties Union are trying to "spin" the press that the non-binding net neutrality resolution passed by the Maine Senate is somehow an important first for a state.
This episode in Maine really is emblematic of the whole net neutrality movement.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2007-06-11 10:55
Google, in making a high-profile complaint to the Justice Department and State Attorney Generals, about Microsoft's latest operating system Vista, appears to be naively unaware of its own antitrust vulnerabilities in its pending Google-DoubleClick antitrust review at the FTC.
It has always been unwise for those in "glass houses to throw stones."
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Sun, 2007-06-10 22:54
Just after Google's CEO Eric Schmidt summarily dismissed privacy concerns as an issue in the FTC's review of the Google-DoubleClick merger, a privacy watchdog group said "Google inc.'s privacy practices are the worst among the Internet's top destinations," according to an AP article "Watchdog group slams Google on privacy."
Why is privacy a competitive issue in the Google-DoubleClick merger?
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2007-06-07 18:20
FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell gave an outstanding speech today at the Broadband Policy Summit in which he did the single best job I have seen totally debunking the OECD rankings that purportedly indicate the US is falling behind on broadband.
Commissioner McDowell explains with example after example -- how skewed the OECD methodology is.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2007-06-06 11:33
Like the discredited and shameful congressional practice of fleecing the American taxpayer with "earmarking" public funds for special interests, Frontline-Google and eBay-Skype are asking for the equivalent of special interest commercial "earmarks" from the FCC.
It is outrageous that the FCC is actually entertaining these proposed special interest scams against the American taxpayer.
What am I talking about specifically? Two special interest spectrum/policy "earmarks" are getting a lot of press attention lately.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2007-06-05 19:26
Yet another state legislature has rejected passing a law mandating net neutrality -- this time in Maine, the home state of Senator Olympia Snowe, one of net neutrality's primary sponsors and highest profile proponents in the US Senate.
To let the net neutrality proponents save face, the Maine Senate passed a resolution, not legislation, that asks for a study on net neutrality to be completed next year.
I fully expect that Moveon.org and SaveTheInterent will continue to waste valuable state legislative time and resources on a problem they cannot even define or prove exists.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2007-06-04 19:09
An Associated Press article, "Google Chairman dismisses privacy issue" could turn out to be like waving a red cape in front of a bull.