More Information and Resources

The Net Neutrality issue is too important to leave to the politicians and the musicians. Here are some resources that will help you get to the bottom of the Net Neutrality debate:

Arpan Sura, " Net Neutrality Nonsense: Don't Give Feds Massive Power over the Internet", FreedomWorks, May 4, 2006 at http://www.freedomworks.org/informed/issues_template.php?issue_id=2578

Heritage Foundation
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Regulation/bg1941.cfm

Cato Insitute
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=1365

The Washington Post weighed in AGAINST net neutrality mandates:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/12/AR2006031200808.html

Christopher S. Woo, “The Economics of Net Neutrality: Why the Physical Layer of the Internet Should Not Be Regulated,” Progress On Point Release 11.11, Progress and Freedom Foundation, July 2004, at http://www.pff.org/issues-pubs/pops/pop11.11yoonetneutrality.pdf.

Concerns about network neutrality are unfounded because network providers do not control a large enough share of the national market to give them leverage over other content providers. The benefits of deviation from network neutrality are that network owners will be able to realize substantial economic efficiencies and promote economic welfare by offering varied services in response to consumer preference.  The focus of the debate should be on how to encourage more competition in the provision of last-mile services, as that is the least competitive part of the telecommunications market yet holds the possibility for new entries and technologies to greatly increase competition if variations in protocols and infrastructure are allowed.

Hahn, Robert, and Wallsten, Scott.  “Economics of Net Neutrality,”  AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, Related Publication 06-13, April 2006, available at http://www.aei-brookings.org/admin/authorpdfs/page.php?id=1269

Mandating network neutrality could erode incentives to provide broadband access and could prevent new applications and services from being provided by preventing broadband providers from internalizing positive network externalities.  Broadband providers would not be able to set up and charge for internet fast lanes for high value uses such as telemedicine or VoIPs, delaying deployment of these technologies.  More competition in high-speed internet access could be brought about by making more spectrum available and by removing barriers to entry in local markets through deregulation.

Thierer, Adam D. "Net Neutrality": Digital Discrimination or Regulatory Gamesmanship in Cyberspace?” Policy Analysis, No. 507, January 12, 2004, available at http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa507.pdf

Provides a list of 10 problems with network neutrality and critiques the regulatory implications of network neutrality, instead advocating market-based solutions to calls for network-neutrality.

“The Digital Age Communication Act’s Regulatory Framework and Net Neutrality: A Statement of The DACA Regulatory Framework Working Group,” March 2006, available at http://www.pff.org/issues-pubs/communications/other/031707dacastmt.pdf.

Argues that the Digital Age Communication Act’s case by case approach to anti-competitive practices in telecommunications markets is superior to network neutrality legislation by avoiding ex ante rules that would likely have unintended consequences while still maintaining ex post relief in increasingly competitive markets.

Testimony of Randolph J. May, Senior Fellow and Director of Communications Policy Studies
The Progress and Freedom Foundation on “H. R. ____, a Committee Print on the Communications Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhancement Act of 2006 ” before the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet Committee on Energy and Commerce
U.S. House of Representatives March 30, 2006, available at http://www.pff.org/issues-pubs/testimony/060330telecom.pdf

May warns against a net neutrality specific provision, but advises that if one becomes part of legislation, it should tie FCC enforcement to a competition-based standard that will require fact based economic analysis of the particular marketplace to prevent the regulation from turning into a common carrier regime for broadband providers.