[IP] Re: FCC Brings On "Distinguished Scholar in Residence" shakes up the broadcasters...

[David Farber <dave@farber.net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.net>
Date: December 29, 2009 10:02:40 AM EST
To: dave@farber.net, "ip" <ip@v2.listbox.com>
Subject: Re: [IP] FCC Brings On "Distinguished Scholar in Residence" shakes up the broadcasters...

At 03:11 PM 12/28/2009, Tim Pozar quoted Stuart Benjamin:

>   This essay addresses the question whether one should support
>   regulatory proposals that one believes are, standing alone, bad
>   public policy in the hope that they will do such harm that they
>   will ultimately produce (likely unintended) good results. For
>   instance, one may regard a set of proposed regulations as
>   foolish and likely to hobble the industry regulated, but perhaps
>   desirable if one believes that we would be better off without
>   that industry.

This quote is particularly germane. Some of us in the broadband industry are already of the opinion that this, in fact, is the goal of "network neutrality" regulations and legislation: to make it impossible to engage profitably in the provision of Internet service. This would pave the way for the nationalization of the Internet, as advocated openly by Obama administration advisor Susan Crawford (who had a hand in crafting the proposed regulations) as well as Robert McChesney (founder of the DC lobbying group Free Press deleted by editor n).

This begs the question: Are such tactics Constitutional? Or do they constitute a regulatory taking of one's business?

--Brett Glass





-------------------------------------------