« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Tech at Night: AT&T, FCC, Net Neutrality, Paperwork Reduction Act

Tech at Night

Happy weekend, all. To get personal, had some real excitement on my end. Preemptively replaced my chair before it fell apart, since the last one I let fall apart collapsed while I was sitting in it. I was lucky the only injury I took was a smack on each arm. But, the new chair had the LUMBAR PAD OF DOOM which started killing my back. I’ve gotten the chair adjusted, pulling the Death Pad™ way back, stopped using my pillow which changed the positioning of the pad on my back, and all should be well now. Yes, I somehow take a profession that involves sitting down and still manage to be injury-prone.

So, we’re back to talking about competition again. The FCC has announced what its rules will be for the AT&T/T-Mobile deal. Says Cnet: “First it has to determine if the deal will meet specific requirements in the Communications Act and FCC rules. And second it will determine if the merger is in the public interest.” I expect that the Communications Act won’t be a big deal, but the “public interest” fudge will be the big fight.

What the left isn’t going to allow the possibility of, though, is the idea that this acquisition might be needed just to keep AT&T competitive with Verizon at the top. Reports like this from the American Consumer Institute should inform the FCC, though. Catch this key takeaway of the market after a series of mergers it’s already seen: “The combination of higher usage and lower prices means that consumer welfare has increased significantly – not what would be expected from a “failed market.””

Of course, we all know that the Obama FCC is going to bend over backward to listen to mushy-headed analysis like this in USA Today. In this fantasyland analysis, ISPs are going to be able to successfully compete by deliberately making their services slower and less effective for popular sites. Given that the reverse has been happening, and we see facts like free Facebook on Delta flights (non-neutral but the radicals never complained, funny that), any sensible FCC would demand proof. But this is the dumbest bit of all, that reflects a complete lack of understanding of the capital expenditures ISPs must make:

Over time, Internet companies will spend their resources developing the infrastructure for the higher tiers, neglecting enhancements in lower tiers. You’ll be in the “economy” cabin while others are in business or first class. At best, you’ll get peanuts.

So, according to Rhonda Abrams, ISPs are going to develop two parallel networks: spending billions for a rarefied higher tier of service… and then spending billions more on a crippled secondary network for everyone else? In what science fiction world is this a profitable proposition? The forces of Internet regulation and Net Neutrality are really having to reach now, as they’ve become an embattled fringe minority in America.

And yes, Net Neutrality has become such a minority that even the great wall of union solidarity has been broken. The Songwriters Guild of America has come out against Net Neutrality. This move is bi-winning for me, because not only is it true out that the recording industry can benefit greatly from innovative service partnerships that Net Neutrality might prohibit, but that it’s the freeloaders who want regulation to prevent them from downloading what they want without paying for it. I’ve long argued that the industry’s problems are as much of their own making as Napster’s, thanks to their years-long refusal to adapt to new technologies and sell music online. Fortunately, Steve Jobs forced them into the 21st century, and now they don’t want the FCC to force them back.

Speaking of innovation though, The same music industry needs to back off of Amazon. Online storage is not a radio station, and that’s all there is to it. To force Amazon to pay fees for this is as crazy as the idea the music industry also has put forward in the past, to demand fees off of blank media sales. This is regressive by the industry. Innovate, don’t run to government.

MagicJack is in trouble. magicJack’s subsidiary YMax has been milking the system for extra money from big, bad AT&T, only to get smacked by the FCC. Now every other phone provider is going to have the green light to get the same ruling. If magicJack’s continued operation has depended on call termination fees, it may be time to start looking for another phone provider for magicJack users.

Final fascinating note: Apparently the FCC is dragging on the Paperwork Reduction Act, which was passed over 30 years ago. The FCC has serious problems and needs major reform, now.

And make sure you catch the latest TobyToons edition on Google!

COMMENTS

  • http://itsaboutliberty.com/ Conservative Phantom

    Seizes domain names of PokerStars, FullTilt and others.

    Read about all details at this site:

    http://itsaboutliberty.com/index.php/topic,1046.0.html

    Disgusting loss of freedom and liberty.

  • Doc Holliday

    At least our tax dollars are going to a good cause. Those online poker players are a real threat to national security.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Your comment isn’t accurate.

  • http://tsa-123.blogspot.com trentanson

    i don’t know why more people aren’t talking about this topic. Net Neutrality is a huge threat to the advance and innovation to this country on the internet. and its like people don’t care about it, it seems like. i just don’t understand.

  • Doc Holliday

    Goodlatte and Kyl lobbied for a long time for the ban on internet gambling. Frist attached the ban to a ports security bill at the 11th hour, right before his career was done for; Bush signed the bill into law.

    I can only marginally blame Obama because he enforced the law passed during the Bush administration. Actually, if I have to be honest, this was entirely the Republican’s fault.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
  • Doc Holliday

    If someone is interested debating the facts, I will gladly do so with them. Since you are not interested in this, I can only guess at your, ah.. argument?

    My guess is you are implying something like this: ” the specifically indicted folks broke a bunch of scary sounding laws such as wire fraud etc”.

    To that I must agree. But I am not interested in 5 or 6 owners of gambling sites. I am interested in the millions of American online poker players who can’t play tonight and have likely lost hundreds of millions of dollars they can’t get to now.

    My guess of your response to my response would be “well they broke the law”.

    My response to my guess of your response to my response is

    “that is the point, they broke a stupid, statist, cynical law, that outlawed liberty. And just like the stupid law of Prohibition, it made law abiding people into criminals”.

    Now, my first post explained who passed that neo- prohibitionist law.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
  • Doc Holliday
  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Obama and Holder do something. Like a good Kossack, you run in here and start ranting about Republicans.

    I don’t debate with the delusional.

  • Doc Holliday

    that is what is happening, I am sure people here believe you. I am a Kossack, I am ranting against Republicans for no reason. Well, hell, they are the ones who passed the stupid law. You belittled my argument with a dismissive response, like you are some type of teacher or something. I check mated you. I have the facts and you do not. You just want to start stuff with any libertarian oriented person on this site.

    Did you hear that Kossack Sarah Palin ranting against Republicans in Madison yesterday? The facts are the facts. I am done responding to these absurd, vapid, non substantive, attack comments.

  • Doc Holliday

    how stupid do you think RS “readers” really are?

  • aesthete

    the Republicans have done that merits critique over the last 12 years. They’ve been absolutely, and we should be saying “thank you sir, may I have another.” Otherwise, we’re just ungrateful Kossacks.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
  • Doc Holliday

    is that you opposed my comment here when I blamed Obama and the FBI for wasting our national security dollars. But later, you claimed I was blaming Republicans and not the real culprit, Obama and Holder.

    Even if I just joined, rather than having been a member here for 5 years who constantly bashes the left and Obama, your tactic would not hold. You simply just like to make one liner negative responses to people interested in freedom.

  • Doc Holliday

    lol, but seriously.

    Ignoring that issue, you have a point. I need to be nicer to my betters, the Republicans have been very good masters.

  • Doc Holliday

    I should have said they have been lenient masters. Something about doing my taxes that makes me forget their tolerance of our existence.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Your last sentence slips the mask a bit.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    It passed the House after all.

  • Doc Holliday

  • Doc Holliday

    but you are making a mess of this place. Quit antagonizing fellow RS’ers and accusing them of unnamed conspiracies, it will help you with your job.

  • Doc Holliday

    I actually thought this was an open thread. The diarist did not say anything to me about it so I just went with the discussion….as it were.

    And to Neil, I hope your back feels better. I also hope you get off mine, we are supposed to be on the same side here.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    When you start rattling off Republicans to falsely blame for things they didn’t do, instead of joining me in pointing out the true behavior of the Obama and Holder team, I’m going to speak up.

    Join me in recognizing the stark difference between Democrats and Republicans, and we’re definitely on the same side.

    :)

    And thanks,

  • Doc Holliday

    the Republicans mentioned were THE reason the internet gambling ban of 2006 went into law. Goodlatte and Kyl sponsored the legislation and Frist pushed it through as an add on to an unrelated security bill; President Bush signed the ban into law.

    this is the act that became law http://www.internetlibrary.com/statuteitem.cfm?Num=17

    Here is the list of sponsors http://www.opencongress.org/wiki/Unlawful_Internet_Gambling_Enforcement_Act_of_2006

    Of course I blame Obama and Holder, they love to use the government to beat up on people. But do we blame the cop for enforcing the law or do we blame the people that created bad laws? It is called intellectual honesty.

    If you refrained from saying I blamed someone falsely- which is false- I would have appreciated your response more.

  • Doc Holliday

    I don’t want you to accuse me of a false statement :) But the people mentioned were not just sponsors, they were the ones who pushed the ban on moral grounds. Of course we know there were other reasons, but I won’t even get into those, any search engine can help ya out with that.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    No, no, no.

    Do you even read your own links?

    Do you even read the indictments involved?

  • Doc Holliday

    I hope you got some good painkillers, because I can’t imagine why you keep asking me to criticize Democrats. Hell, I have been doing it here for five years! I don’t have a moderate bone in my body and everyone who has read me knows that. It seems to me you just don’t like anyone who calls themselves a libertarian-conservative; I can’t think of any other possibility for the way you have been acting. You don’t have an argument based on any issue that I can glean.

    I am familiar with the indictments. The FBI has been making a case based on the 2006 law for some time. If the bad law was not passed none of the crimes would have happened. Again, it is just like prohibition, same thing. It helped criminals make money and made criminals out of people just trying to have a drink. The major impact of this is it takes away freedom, it is that simple. If you don’t get that, I can’t help you.

    I am done with this nonsense, you want to take shots at me, fine, I really don’t care what you think. In fact, no one here knows what you think because you have yet to make a substantive comment in this thread.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    I didn’t say anything about Democrats and you, but you brought it up again?

    But please, go on spreading libertarian propaganda about the UIGEA. Make this your ever loving Reichstag fire.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    You should know better, since you were comment #1 when I burst that bubble 4 years ago.

  • jackhammer

    At least what I have read about it. It seems the justification has little to do with the actual gambling,a dn more to do with the complicated bank workarounds to get players into games,a dn profits into places where they don’t have the same legal restrictions and tax liabilities as in regulated gaming.

    If these companies were smart,a dn listed in Vanuatu or whatever jurisdiction has no rules, and had zero US presence, then I would think there is absolutely nothign the US government could do. But they want to have their cake and eat it too. So they are registered in the states, but helping clients move money through obtuse banking constructs, and that is what they are caught on. al capone went down for taxes too.

    But maybe, like in the TVshack thing, there are lobbyists form Vegas pushing for this ban…

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    That’s just it. Had they not set up a sham bank, which is being alleged, then this probably wouldn’t have happened.

    They *are* organized in foreign countries, though. FTP is in Ireland, PS is on the Isle of Man, and Cereus bases its operations in the separatist Kahnawake Mohawk Territory in Canada.