You are here
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2012-02-24 18:36
The evidence below shows the Verizon-Cable agreement is clearly in the public interest, if the FCC fairly reviews the agreement and all of the relevant facts, in the full context of the highly competitive wireless ecosystem.
Top Reasons Why Verizon-Cable Agreement is in the Public Interest
Increases competition: The agreement increases competition because it enables:
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2012-02-06 09:33
Reports that the Senate Antitrust Subcommittee will hold a hearing on the Verizon Wireless-Cable agreement spotlights an old truism: What one looks for, one sees. What the Government ultimately sees here largely will depend on whether the Government looks backward through an analog competitive lens or looks forward through an Internet competitive convergence lens. In a nutshell, if they look backwards with 1996 cable-telco Silo-Vision lenses, they will see an agreement not predicted in 1996; however if they look forward with 2012 Internet-Vision lenses that see 4G LTE wireless, iPhones/Android, VoIP, DBS, video streaming, Netflix, cable modems, DSL, FIOS, Skype voice/video file-sharing, cloud-computing etc. – they will see an agreement that is not at all surprising or problematic given the competitive context of today and the future.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2012-01-04 11:21
Important free market communications legislation introduced in mid-December warrants flagging because it brings needed attention to a real and growing problem, how obsolete communications law stifles innovation, growth and consumer benefit.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2011-12-21 19:00
This week an FCC Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ordered Comcast to carry The Tennis Channel in the same tier and channel neighborhood as The Golf Channel and Versus, another sports channel.
1. Implements Obsolete Law: The section of law at issue here, Section 616 of the 1992 Cable Act, is predicated on early 1990s market conditions of cable being a monopoly video distributor with large ownership interests in cable channels. Two decades later, that market assessment predicate is obsolete as cable now has only 60% of the video distribution market and dramatically less ownership interests in cable channels. At core the FCC has to decide if it is fair, sound or legitimate competition policy to completely ignore current competition facts.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2011-12-06 15:16
The out-of-the-box thinking that led to Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Bright House to sell $3.6b of AWS spectrum to competitor Verizon is a watershed competitive development which ultimately will flush out the real FCC.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2011-12-05 18:24
The unprecedented release of a FCC draft staff analysis opposing the the proposed AT&T/T-Mobile transaction could backfire legally, undermining its intent to backstop the DOJ's pending lawsuit against the merger.
See my Forbes Tech Capitalist post here on the "Top Ten Flaws in the FCC's AT&T/T-Mobile Competition Analysis."
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2011-12-02 14:47
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 2, 2011
Contact: Scott Cleland
Verizon/SpectrumCo Deal Reflects Metamorphosis of Communications Competition
Broadband, Internet, & Cloud Computing Technologies Creating Omni-Modal Competition
WASHINGTON D.C. – Verizon Wireless’ purchase of 20 MHz of currently unused, near-nationwide AWS spectrum from Comcast, Time Warner Cable, and Bright House Networks for $3.6b and reselling rights spotlights the extraordinary metamorphosis of communications competition being driven by broadband, Internet and cloud computing technologies.
The following quotes may be attributed to Scott Cleland, Chairman of NetCompetition.org:
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2011-11-30 12:04
The likely passage of online anti-piracy legislation (SOPA/PIPA) in 2012 has put a spotlight on the substantial ad-based business interests aligned with piracy and against piracy enforcement.
See my Forbes Tech Capitalist post here to learn why Grand Theft Auto-mated is such big business and so anti-piracy enforcement.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2011-11-28 12:06
The only thing proponents of Net neutrality regulation and opponents of online piracy legislation appear to have in common is the boy-crying-wolf "censorship" rhetoric of FreePress' Save The Internet activists.
See my Forbes Tech Capitalist post here, "SOPA Opponents' Bogus Net Neutrality Comparisons."
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2011-11-10 13:39
The Senate's 52-46 rejection of the Resolution of Disapproval of the FCC's net neutrality regulations (after the House voted differently 240-179 to disapprove last spring), is a classic pyrrhic victory for net neutrality proponents in two big ways.
First, the issue put the FCC on the political radar screen of every Member of Congress, and not in a good way.
For several hours the Senate debated and then officially voted on whether the Constitutionally-authorized Congress should be the entity to effectively establish new Internet law, or whether unelected FCC commissioners with no direct statutory authority from Congress should be able to effectively establish new Internet law and effectively claim boundless unchecked regulatory power whenever they see fit.
Supporters of the FCC were put in the very awkward position of politically having to defend a constitutional/legal position that: