Jump to content

A regulated and taxed internet


Azalin

Recommended Posts

For a historical perspective, a comparison of results between the EU's Title II style regulation and the U.S. hands off policy.

 

http://internetinnovation.org/images/misc_content/Impact_of_Title_II_Regulation_on_Comms_Investment_-_FINAL.pdf

 

Comprehensive data covering 2011 and 2012 reveal that the deregulatory approach has produced significantly more capital investment, competition, and broadband coverage in the US. Even the European Commission (EC) has acknowledged its Title II-style regulatory approach is the reason European broadband networks have fallen behind those in the US.

The data indicate that the significantly lower levels of capital investment, competition, and broadband coverage in the EU are attributable to its Title II regulatory approach. Last year, the EU government itself acknowledged that investments in high speed broadband are taking place more quickly in the US and concluded that EU regulatory policy was to blame. The EU determined that Europe must adopt investment-friendly broadband policies in order to maintain its global competitiveness.

 

Ironically, the US is poised to go in the opposite direction. The FCC is expected to impose Title II regulation on broadband providers when it votes on net neutrality rules in February.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 145
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

ROBERT MCDOWELL: Overturn The FCC’s Power Grab.

 

 

 

 

Thursday marked the largest government intervention into the Internet ecosphere in American history. By equating the dynamic 21st century Internet to the telephone system of 1934, the Federal Communications Commission has thrust powerful but antiquated utility-style regulations onto the U.S. tech economy. . . .

 

The FCC’s power grab discards the bipartisan light-touch regulatory framework laid out during the Clinton administration.

 

That hands-off approach made the Net the greatest deregulatory success story of all time.

 

History teaches us that utility-style regulation raises costs to consumers, reduces investment and innovation, and creates uncertainty due to the politics-driven nature of “mother may I innovate” government mandates. Regulation only grows. Now the Internet cannot escape that fate.

 

The ultimate result of more government encroachment will be something akin to the sagging European Internet market, where investment in broadband infrastructure is only one-fourth of America’s due to heavy-handed regulations. Even worse, this new power grab could trigger expanded intergovernmental powers over the Web through existing telecom treaties, jeopardizing Internet freedom.

 

What many in Silicon Valley don’t understand is that, according to the Supreme Court’s 2005 Brand X decision, nearly any “tech” company that builds a telecom-style network to deliver its content and apps has the potential to be captured by the FCC’s new rules.
If the agency tries to exempt some companies but not others, it will be choosing the politically favored over everyone else.

 

 

 

 

 

Well, that’s the whole point of this exercise, one suspects. I mean, isn’t it always?

 

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can forget about Verizon expanding their FIOS offering into new areas soon.

They're dropping the Left Coast completely to pay for the $5billion they spent at auction on the wireless spectrum.

 

I feel the Internet stagnating already. Thanks Big Brother Kim Jong Un B. O. Putney Swope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 year later...
  • 2 months later...
×
×
  • Create New...