13 November 2007

Network Neutrality (again)

You can probably figure out that I am skeptical about the appropriateness and efficacy of ex ante internet regulation. At the same time, I believe that the Internet should not subject users to undue restrictions. So, I think the approach that the NNSquad is terrific. This group has no regulatory powers, but can discover and report incidents, like the recent Comcast/BitTorrent incident (see this for an analysis/discussion). This kind of "regulation by information" may just be the most effective approach, especially as we reason through what "reasonable" user expectations are (or should be) and what "reasonable" provider behavior is (or should be) as the market evolves and as application requirements evolve. (By the way, here is another opinion on this group.)

Do you think that regulation by information is strong enough? Do you think that ex ante regulation (or even functional separation) is necessary anyway?

1 comment:

olacherio said...

Hi there,
i'm studying an LLM in IT Law here in Scotland,Uk and in the course of my work stumbled on your blog.
I'm currently writing a short paper on hw the regulators in japan's telecoms market can and should use compettion law to balance divergent stakeholder's interests.(scope being limited to 3g /convergence mobile telephony market)
I'm confused as to whether the NRA is the MPHPT or the MIC!there's so mnay different names even on the official NRA websites-
can you point me in the right direction by any chance?what do you think?who would you say are the other stakeholder's apart from nttdocomo,kddi and softbank? how would you answer this question?
I know i'm totally trying to pick your brain but if you do feel inclined can you ppplease mail me your thoughts at divajades(at)yahoo(dot)co(dot)uk?