Sorry for missing Tech at Night on Friday. After that near-miss with a cold, I decided to start the weekend a little early that night. But we’re back. So with five days of news to catch up on, let’s see what we have here.
Here’s a reminder of why Net Neutrality was a terrible idea. Making people pay for what they use creates opportunities for innovation. If ESPN wants to negotiate bulk rates for wireless data, let them!
And yet that John McCain would add more regulations. We need less micromanagement of cable, not more.
Continue reading »
Right now the top issues are both getting lots of attention in the Senate. One is the cybersecurity bill. It’s been difficult for me to find out much about what’s going on with it, and it turns out there’s a reason. Sources familiar with the situation indicate to me that Harry Reid has been negotiating with Republicans in bad faith. Even Republicans who love to negotiate with Democrats, and are well known for producing major pieces of legislation with Democrats, are being stonewalled.
Lieberman-Collins is even worse than I thought, too.
Continue reading »
John McCain. Lisa Murkowski. Kay Bailey Hutchison. Saxby Chambliss. Richard Burr. Dan Coats.
No, I’m not listing the centrist wing of the Senate Republicans. I’m listing some of the co-sponsors of SECURE IT, the bill that Senate Republicans have been forced to bring forth because the extremist Cybersecurity bill by Joe Lieberman and Susan Collins just couldn’t be bargained with. That’s right, John McCain of McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, and McCain-Lieberman couldn’t find a way to negotiate a compromise on this.
It’s the right bill to pass. It’s since gotten oversight champion Chuck Grassley and TEA Party favorite Ron Johnson on board, among others. It addresses the key security problems we face without giving the proven-incompetent feds any new powers over the Internet. Here’s KBH on the bill.
Continue reading »
Instead of the transparent Obama administration we were promised, from the Obama FCC, what we have here is failure to communicate.
We need to continue to cut the FCC out of the loop, the old regulations are harmful when it comes to retransmission consent and the whole cable company/local broadcaster nexus. Clear it out, deregulate, restore the free market, and the public will benefit.
Continue reading »
When Jim DeMint and Steve Scalise first started talking about reforming the regulated relationship between broadcasters and cable companies, oh the fits that were thrown. Even a certain conservative group jumped out in front complaining. But look: these regulations are worth big bucks to the side they favor, and the negotiation deadlocks they produce don’t help the public, they only force everyone to deal with blackouts.
The comprehensive reform package commonly referred to as Retransmission Consent reform should pass. I wonder if FCC thinks it will, as it has begun by tweaking Must Carry rules itself, possibly as pre-emption?
Continue reading »
What’s the ideal situation for the cable television marketplace? A free market. Cable providers should be able to negotiate, or not, with broadcasters and copyright holders to purchase streams to resell to their customers. Jim DeMint is trying to bring us closer to that by ending special leverage in the marketplace given to broadcasters.
You see, the rules in place now are not designed to create a free market. Just as the Net Neutrality regulations are designed to restrict customer choice, out of fear that those customers would favor paying for superior service, so too did regulators fear that cable companies would win in the marketplace. So regulations were put into place to favor local broadcasters.
There’s a lot of inside baseball here in the retransmission consent debate. It’s tricky to unwind a complex regulatory system. But DeMint’s plan is a step forward.
So is CISPA. Some say the bill is risky and may get too much information out into the open, with too little oversight. That might be right. The bill might stand tweaking. But the concept is good. I find it interesting that Google isn’t taking a position on it, possibly out of fear of a left-wing backlash.
You see, there’s more to CISPA opposition than just CISPA. There’s also the Lieberman-Collins cybersecurity bill at stake.
Continue reading »
November 20. That’s the day the Obama administration has chosen to regulate the Internet after what even The Hill calls “a partisan vote” at the FCC to pass the Net Neutrality regulations. I’m hoping Verizon and/or MetroPCS will sue and win a stay before that date, though I don’t know how likely that is for a court to act that strongly.
I’ve said much about the House and its strong opposition to Barack Obama’s regulatory overreach, but Senators are unhappy as well. Kay Bailey Hutchison is ready to fight. It looks like she will push to get the Senate to go forward with using the Congressional Review Act, as the House already did, to repeal Net Neutrality.
Continue reading »
Hello. Yes, I’m late again. But I’m genuinely starting to have fun with OpenGL ES 2. So Tech at Night got to wait a bit. Sorry!
Anyway, as I usually do when I have a link to a RedState article, I’ll start tonight with it. RedState Insider suggests cutting the budget while implementing better policy by eliminating the Agriculture Department’s venture into tech subsidy, the Rural Utilities Service. We don’t need to spend billions to have government compete against the private sector. Even if we wanted it, and we don’t, we simply can’t afford it.
What’s the USDA doing in tech policy anyway?
Continue reading »
The new Congress is in session, and while some people are supremely interested in badmouthing the new Republican leadership, I’m more interested in trying to work with the Republicans to oppose the actual bad things being done by the Obama administration. I don’t have time to complain about past votes. Because guess what? Republicans who were previously bad under the Democrats can turn out good now that we’re in charge.
Because the fact is, the new, unprecedented, illegal Net Neutrality regulations are in fact a confused mess. In particular, the rules on paid prioritization on the Internet are so muddled that the whole thing is probably going to get tossed as soon as the FCC tries to stomp the boot of regulation onto anyone (which might be Comcast, because everyone knows the Democrats hate Comcast and the radicals are still going to be fuming about the NBC Universal/Comcast merger).
Also, Netflix itself my run afoul of the new regulations. That’s right, poor widdle Netflix, supposedly the victim of big, bad ISPs, is probably in violation of the new regulations. Heh.
Continue reading »