From the various reports of briefings about the FCC’s planned rules for the 600 MHz incentive auction, two things appear clear. First, the FCC doesn’t trust market forces. And second, the FCC doesn’t want the highest bidders to win the spectrum.
Given the competition in the wireless broadband market – indeed, in the broadband marketplace at large – the costs of the FCC interfering with proposals like AT&T’s are likely to outweigh the benefits.
Activists are freaking out about AT&T’s Sponsored Data plan because it defiles their utopian ideal of perfect Internet egalitarianism of universal, unlimited, free, downstream-bandwidth for edge creators.
The FCC and DOJ do not want to look ridiculous applying a spectrum cap to Verizon and AT&T and not Sprint when the FCC’s own Wireless Competition report shows that Sprint controls roughly twice as many MHz per population as either Verizon or AT&T.
The CTIA just released its semi-annual statistics on the wireless industry’s performance, and its bad news for all those supposed data-driven, pro-regulation proponents who are in search of evidence or data to justify regulating wireless or wireless spectrum holdings.
The girl in pink will not be changing into a blue dress after all. AT&T finally threw up its hands after months of wrangling with the Federal Communications Commission and[...]
The Daily Caller this weekend published my piece on why I think the AT&T/T-Mobile merger should be allowed to happen. An excerpt: … Third, charges that the merger will stifle[...]
A big reason why The Heartland Institute argues for less government regulation of industry — especially in the digital economy — is because the choices individuals make in a free[...]
The Heartland Institute has technology experts on staff who weighed in on the merger of AT&T and T-Mobile. Bruce Edward Walker, managing editor of InfoTech & Telecom News and myself[...]