In August 2015, I
wrote a blog entitled “FCC’s ‘Gatekeeper’
Theory Is a Flawed Market Failure Analysis,” explaining how the FCC’s 2015 Open Internet Order fails a basic
cost/benefit analysis and how it misuses data in order to support its claim
that competition in the broadband market is lacking. Then, in January 2016, FSF
President Randolph May and I wrote a blog entitled “Mobile Broadband
Is a Substitute for Fixed Broadband,” where we state that the FCC continues
to misrepresent competition in the broadband market by refusing to acknowledge
the extent to which mobile broadband, for an increasing segment of the U.S.
population, is a substitute for various fixed broadband services.
In a Hill article on January 20,
2016, Mario Trujillo reported that advocacy groups have been pressing the FCC to
adopt Internet privacy rules. In a letter to the FCC, the
advocacy groups say: “[Internet
service providers’] position as Internet gatekeepers gives them a comprehensive
view of consumer behavior and until now privacy protections for consumers using
those services have been unclear.” The letter urges the FCC to “move
forward as quickly as possible on a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proposing
strong rules to protect consumers from having their personal data collected and
shared by their broadband provider without affirmative consent.”
The longer the Open Internet
Order is in effect, the more people will realize that the
regulatory costs imposed by the Order are stifling innovation and investment from
both Internet service providers and edge providers. (See my October 2015 blog and Randolph
May’s December 2015 blog for more on
this.) However, there is reason to worry that if the FCC continues to misuse
data to claim that “gatekeepers” eliminate choices for consumers, that
switching costs create monopolies, and that mobile broadband should not be
included in an analysis of broadband marketplace competition, then the FCC will
be able to use these claims to justify adopting more Internet regulations.
Regardless of how
Internet privacy rules would positively or negatively impact consumers, it
should be concerning that the Commission could (and likely will) use misguided
analysis to adopt such rules. In evaluating whether Internet privacy rules (and
other regulations) benefit competition, consumers, and economic growth, it is
imperative that they be supported by accurate data and valid cost/benefit
analyses. But if the data and analysis used to inaccurately describe the
broadband market during the Open Internet
proceeding is used to draft Internet privacy rules, then the proceeding will start
off on the wrong foot.
Posts
