July 2011

On CNET this morning, I argue that delay in approving FCC authority for voluntary incentive auctions is largely the fault of last year’s embarrassing net neutrality rulemaking. While most of the public advocates and many of the industry participants have moved on to other proxy battles (which for most was all net neutrality ever was), [...]

That’s the question I take up in my latest Forbes column, “The Danger Of Making Facebook, LinkedIn, Google And Twitter Public Utilities.”  I note the rising chatter in the blogosphere about the potential regulation of social networking sites, including Facebook and Twitter. In response, I argue: public utilities are, by their very nature, non-innovative. Consumers [...]

Awesome. Netflix Relief Fund with Jason Alexander from Jason Alexander

Woodrow Hartzog, Assistant Professor at Samford University’s Cumberland School of Law, and a Scholar at the Stanford’s Center for Internet and Society, discusses his new paper in Communications Law and Policy entitled, The New Price To Play: Are Passive Online Media Users Bound By Terms of Use? By simply browsing the internet, one can be obligated by a “terms of use” agreement displayed on a website. These agreements, according to Hartzog, aren’t always displayed where a user can immediately read it, and they often contain complicated legalese. Web browsers can be affected unfavorably by these agreements, particularly when it comes to copyright and privacy issues. Hartzog evaluates what the courts are doing about this, and discusses the different factors that could determine the enforceability of these agreements, including the type of notice a web browser receives.

[By Geoffrey Manne and Joshua Wright.  Cross-posted at TOTM] Our search neutrality paper has received some recent attention.  While the initial response from Gordon Crovitz in the Wall Street Journal was favorable, critics are now voicing their responses.  Although we appreciate FairSearch’s attempt to engage with our paper’s central claims, its response is really little more than an extended [...]

Do-Not-Track is not inconceivable itself. It’s like the word “inconceivable” in the movie The Princess Bride. I do not think it means what people think it means—how it is meant to work and how it is likely to offer poor results. Take Mike Swift’s reporting for MercuryNews.com on a study showing that online advertising companies [...]

I have always struggled with the work of media theorist Marshall McLuhan. I find it to be equal parts confusing and compelling; it’s persuasive at times and then utterly perplexing elsewhere.  I just can’t wrap my head around him and yet I can’t stop coming back to him. Today would have been his 100th birthday. [...]

Daily news service TechLawJournal (subscription) reports that the U.S. District Court (DC) has granted summary judgment to the National Security Agency in EPIC v. NSA, a federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case regarding the Electronic Privacy Information Center’s request for records regarding Google’s relationship with the NSA. EPIC requested a wide array of records [...]

A month ago, Rep. Mary Bono Mack introduced a bill (and staff memo) “To protect consumers by requiring reasonable security policies and procedures to protect data containing personal information, and to provide for nationwide notice in the event of a security breach.” These are perhaps the two least objectionable areas for legislating “on privacy” and there’s much to [...]

Hal Singer, managing director at Navigant Economics and adjunct professor at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business, discusses his new paper on wireless competition, co-written by Gerry Faulhaver of the University of Pennsylvania, and Bob Hahn of Oxford. The FCC produces a yearly report on the competitive landscape of the wireless market, which serves as an overview to policy makers and analysts. The report has found the wireless market competitive in years past; however, in the last two years, the FCC is less willing to interpret the market as competitive. According to Singer, the FCC is using indirect evidence, which looks at how concentrated the market is, rather than direct evidence, which looks at falling prices, to make its assessment. In failing to look at the direct evidence, Singer argues that the report comes to an erroneous conclusion about the real state of competition in wireless markets.