About Scott Cleland
![]() |
|
You are hereSkypeTop Ten Flaws in FCC’s AT&T/T-Mobile Competition AnalysisSubmitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2011-12-05 18:24The 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."
NYT's Uninformed War on Competition PolicySubmitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2011-10-26 11:34The New York Times editorial "How to Fix the Wireless Market," is embarrassingly uninformed and totally ignores massive obvious evidence of vibrant American wireless competition. The NYT's conclusion, that more wireless regulation is needed because of "insufficient competition," results from cherry picking a few isolated facts that superficially support their case, while totally ignoring the overwhelming relevant evidence to the contrary. The NYT completely ignores widely-available evidence of vibrant wireless competition and substitution: The Metamorphosis of Communications Competition -- A New FrameworkSubmitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2011-10-21 16:32For those seeking to better understand how communications competition has evolved, expanded, and accelerated to cloud communications competition, don't miss my new six-chart powerpoint presentation: "The Metamorphosis of Communications Competition," here. My bottom line conclusion: The transformation of communications competition requires a transformation in communications law.
I presented this new easy-to-understand framework for understanding exploding communications competition at a NetCompetition event today on Capitol Hill, which also featured excellent presentations by Jeff Eisenach, Managing Director of Navigant Economics, and Ev Ehrlich, President of ESC Company. FCC Denies the Effective Wireless Competition Staring it in the Face -- Internet Competition Series Part IIISubmitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2011-06-27 23:47In another blow to its competition policy credibility and objectivity, the FCC's 308 page, 15th Wireless Competition Report, amazingly reached no conclusion about whether the wireless market was effectively competitive, despite overwhelming evidence of effective competition throughout the report and a dearth of evidence in the report of any discernible anti-competitive issues that would suggest the wireless market was somehow not effectively competitive.
If only the FCC absorbed the significance of the data compiled in their own report, the FCC would conclude that the wireless market was effectively competitive.
Google Sides with WikileaksSubmitted 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:
When Google's Acting CEO Eric Schmidt told the DLD media conference in Munich (as reported by Reuters):
Paid Prioritization: The Demonization of Market EconomicsSubmitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2010-12-13 12:11Now we know what "real net neutrality" and "openness" are, and that they are the antithesis of free market economics or competition. As the FreePress-led letter to the FCC made clear on Friday: "Paid prioritization is the antithesis of openness. Any framework that does not prohibit such economic discrimination arrangements is not real net neutrality." What is "paid prioritization?"
Remember FreePress' last Uneconomics 101 lesson was that "above-cost pricing" was an "unfair business practice." House Net Neutrality Legislation TakeawaysSubmitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2010-09-28 10:28House Democrats have proposed a resolution to Net Neutrality that strongly signals to the FCC majority to not pursue its considered Title II reclassification of broadband as a 1934 regulated telephone service. The House Democrats' draft is here. The implications of this House draft are broad, important and constructive. First, this House Democrat draft signals to the FCC Democrat majority loud and clear that House Democrats do not support the radical FreePress-driven proposal to regulate broadband Internet networks as 1934 common carrier telephone networks. Second, it proves that the FreePress-driven proposal to takeover the Internet and regulate it as a public utility is extreme, way out of the political mainstream, and a non-starter. Third, this legislation proposes a sensible resolution and workable alternative to this destructive polarizing issue that is serving no one who seeks an open Internet that works, grows and innovates without anti-competitive concerns, but only the revolutionary interests of FreePress and its allies that claim they want net neutrality, but really seek a utopian "information commons revolution." Skype's Net Neutrality Infidelity ScandalSubmitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2010-07-14 13:07Skype, one of the high priests of the net neutrality movement, that preaches for Title II monopoly regulation of all the broadband providers it already rides upon for free, has been caught in the act of being blatantly unfaithful to its widely-professed net neutrality principles, by blocking interconnectivity to Fring!
NetCompetition Statement on FCC's Broadband Legal Framework NOISubmitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2010-06-17 14:06FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE June, 17 2010 Contact: Scott Cleland 703-217-2407
“FCC Regulating the Internet like a Phone Company Would Enthrone “Ma Google” “FCC’s Broadband De-competition Policy Would Accelerate Google-opolization of the Net”
Why FCC's broadband public option is a lose-lose gambleSubmitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2010-04-16 15:04The FCC would be making a long-shot bet-the-farm gamble, if it decided to mandate the broadband public option i.e. deeming broadband to be a common-carrier-regulated service and regulating the Internet essentially for the first time.
I. Lose in Court: It is a given that the FCC would be sued; and it is very likely that the Appeals Court and/or the Supreme Court would overturn any FCC unilateral assertion of authority to deem broadband a common carrier service. Pages |