Re: cr> re: regulations


Sender: "Craig A. Johnson" <•••@••.•••>

R.K. Moore wrote:

>         Re/regulation:  My own view is that the regulatory regime we
>         had
> prior the Telcom Reform bill was an excellent one -- evolved over
> time -- and was giving us vibrant competition, rapid innovation, and
> affordable prices -- especially on Internet.

Yeah, we had one heck of a great regulatory regime -- with
monopolist phone companies choking the local loop, monopolist cable
companies gouging the consumer, an FCC over-burdened with matters it
was not set up to handle -- such as an outporing of video dialtone
applications by RBOCs -- and a lone judge making telecom policy for
the entire country on issues related to the Modified Final Judgement.

And this is leaving aside the monumental leaps in wireless and
satellite technologies which literally drive a stake through the
heart of the old encrusted, decrepit regulatory regime.

I think there is no question but that opening the local loop and
letting the RBOCs out into other areas of business was necessary and
inevitable, as was letting cable companies and telephone companies
compete in each others' markets.  Technological progress made the old
regulatory regime as dead as a doornail and about as relevant as
digital transmission was when the old Act was written -- in 1934,
when "wireless" meant one-way radio transmissions, not two-way
digital communications.

The resulting law of course is filled with anti-competitive,
anti-consumer provisions.

But, to suggest that the regulatory regime was not due for a change
is to blind oneself to market and technological realities and to
insist that the past is the present.


 Posted by Andrew Oram  - •••@••.••• - Moderator: CYBER-RIGHTS (CPSR)
   CyberJournal:  (WWW or FTP) -->
 Materials may be reposted in their _entirety_ for non-commercial use.