Comments on: Verizon/NARAL an Argument for Regulation? http://techliberation.com/2007/09/28/verizonnaral-an-argument-for-regulation/ Keeping politicians' hands off the Net & everything else related to technology Sun, 27 May 2012 01:17:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Tom http://techliberation.com/2007/09/28/verizonnaral-an-argument-for-regulation/comment-page-1/#comment-54342 Tom Fri, 28 Sep 2007 21:30:34 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/09/28/verizonnaral-an-argument-for-regulation/#comment-54342 <p>What happens when a lower-profile or less popular organization is censored by Verizon? It's wonderful that market pressure forced Verizon to change their policy so quickly in this case. What I don't understand is why Verizon needs or ought to censor SMSes that I intentionally elected to receive.<br><br>Believe me, SMS is a world where the market is decidedly not working -- particularly not premium SMS, where carriers take up to a 50% cut (and inexplicably disallow charities from using it, at least in this country).<br><br>Fortunately relatively neutral data services seem likely to replace the laughably expensive and limited SMS standard, so I can't get <em>too</em> worked up about this. But it really is a pretty bad situation. A very few gatekeepers continue to increase prices (despite increasing demand and no practical limit on supply) and prevent small players from using the medium.</p> What happens when a lower-profile or less popular organization is censored by Verizon? It’s wonderful that market pressure forced Verizon to change their policy so quickly in this case. What I don’t understand is why Verizon needs or ought to censor SMSes that I intentionally elected to receive.

Believe me, SMS is a world where the market is decidedly not working — particularly not premium SMS, where carriers take up to a 50% cut (and inexplicably disallow charities from using it, at least in this country).

Fortunately relatively neutral data services seem likely to replace the laughably expensive and limited SMS standard, so I can’t get too worked up about this. But it really is a pretty bad situation. A very few gatekeepers continue to increase prices (despite increasing demand and no practical limit on supply) and prevent small players from using the medium.

]]> By: Tom http://techliberation.com/2007/09/28/verizonnaral-an-argument-for-regulation/comment-page-1/#comment-39456 Tom Fri, 28 Sep 2007 20:30:34 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/09/28/verizonnaral-an-argument-for-regulation/#comment-39456 <p>What happens when a lower-profile or less popular organization is censored by Verizon? It's wonderful that market pressure forced Verizon to change their policy so quickly in this case. What I don't understand is why Verizon needs or ought to censor SMSes that I intentionally elected to receive.</p> <p>Believe me, SMS is a world where the market is decidedly not working -- particularly not premium SMS, where carriers take up to a 50% cut (and inexplicably disallow charities from using it, at least in this country).</p> <p>Fortunately relatively neutral data services seem likely to replace the laughably expensive and limited SMS standard, so I can't get <em>too</em> worked up about this. But it really is a pretty bad situation. A very few gatekeepers continue to increase prices (despite increasing demand and no practical limit on supply) and prevent small players from using the medium.</p> What happens when a lower-profile or less popular organization is censored by Verizon? It’s wonderful that market pressure forced Verizon to change their policy so quickly in this case. What I don’t understand is why Verizon needs or ought to censor SMSes that I intentionally elected to receive.

Believe me, SMS is a world where the market is decidedly not working — particularly not premium SMS, where carriers take up to a 50% cut (and inexplicably disallow charities from using it, at least in this country).

Fortunately relatively neutral data services seem likely to replace the laughably expensive and limited SMS standard, so I can’t get too worked up about this. But it really is a pretty bad situation. A very few gatekeepers continue to increase prices (despite increasing demand and no practical limit on supply) and prevent small players from using the medium.

]]> By: Jim Harper http://techliberation.com/2007/09/28/verizonnaral-an-argument-for-regulation/comment-page-1/#comment-54341 Jim Harper Fri, 28 Sep 2007 19:32:20 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/09/28/verizonnaral-an-argument-for-regulation/#comment-54341 <p>Indeed. In a case like this, the choice is between two systems for marshaling Verizon's behavior. The existing one - market forces - reversed a bad decision in 24 hours. The alternative - government regulation - holds fast to <a href="http://www.techliberation.com/archives/042824.php" rel="nofollow">an accumulating litany</a> of bad decisions.</p> Indeed. In a case like this, the choice is between two systems for marshaling Verizon’s behavior. The existing one – market forces – reversed a bad decision in 24 hours. The alternative – government regulation – holds fast to an accumulating litany of bad decisions.

]]> By: Jim Harper http://techliberation.com/2007/09/28/verizonnaral-an-argument-for-regulation/comment-page-1/#comment-39455 Jim Harper Fri, 28 Sep 2007 18:32:20 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/09/28/verizonnaral-an-argument-for-regulation/#comment-39455 <p>Indeed. In a case like this, the choice is between two systems for marshaling Verizon's behavior. The existing one - market forces - reversed a bad decision in 24 hours. The alternative - government regulation - holds fast to <a href="http://www.techliberation.com/archives/042824.php" rel="nofollow">an accumulating litany</a> of bad decisions.</p> Indeed. In a case like this, the choice is between two systems for marshaling Verizon’s behavior. The existing one – market forces – reversed a bad decision in 24 hours. The alternative – government regulation – holds fast to an accumulating litany of bad decisions.

]]>