[1879] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
The NREN and Regulation
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Gordon Cook)
Sun Jan 5 20:14:28 1992
To: com-priv@psi.com
Date: 5 Jan 92 19:34:54 EST (Sun)
From: cook@tmn.com (Gordon Cook)
<<MESSAGE from>> Gordon Cook 05-JAN-92 19:34
cook@tmn
<sigh>... I find that I can not pass on the discussion of regulation of
NREN that Sean helped start yesterday. Someone questioned whether the FCC
has any authority over the NREN. Last April Robert Pepper Chief Office of
Plans and Policy at the FCC told me that he thought it likely that ANS
role in the NREN would be looked at as that of an Enhanced Service
Provider (ESP) offering a Value Added Network (VAN). The FCC views
Prodigy and Compuserve as the same kind of offering (VANs from ESPs). If
the consumer has a CHOICE of VANs from ESPs current regulatory law
apparently finds this to be acceptable. If the price of access to the NREN
is many or even several times that of access to Prodigy or Compuserve, I
have no right to complain that I cannot afford the NREN. For in the eyes
of the FCC NREN = PRODIGY = COMPUSERVE.
I understand that Eli Noam agrees with this equation. I do not understand
why. If he or other like minded people are reading this I hope they will
explain their position.
I would think that most would find it difficult to equate email access to
several million people, direct connect access to several hundred thousand
computers, as well as access to libraries and the multi-media databases
and all the other enticing attractions promised us by advocates of the
NREN vision, to Prodigy and or Compuserve???
If we treat NREN as a yet another PRIVATE solution safely secured from
regulatory restriction, we run the risk of serious impact on the PSTN and
will place ourselves ultimately in a position where we are forced to
answer whether we as a society are willing to be divided into two classes
of information rich on the one hand and the information poor on the other.
In an absolutely free market place where the small providers have to
scurry to keep out of the way once the giants enter the fray, who will be
there when our richest corporations and universities are bidding for
network resources to speak up for the interests of that little girl in
Tenessee who wants to have access to LC to do her homework on dinosaurs?
While I *do* recognize some crazyness in some of our current telecom
regulations, I suggest that there may soon come a day when policy makers
are forced to look at alternatives to a completely hands off situation.
Several come to mind.
1. The government could provide the network in cooperation with the
states the way it does the interstate highway system.
2. Private industry could provide the network in the way that it does the
national power grid subject to state and federal regulation.
3. Private industry could provide the network subject to federal
oversight in the manner of the aviation industry.
There are some more possiblities that i don't wish to go into now. I do
not mean to imply either that I wish a literal mapping of any of these
structures onto NREN. What I do mean to say is that I agree with Sean
that especially in view of the rhetoric that has surrounded the network,
many see it as a PUBLIC good. These people will surely insist on Federal
OVERSIGHT of the network creation process. If the network implementors
and providers should prove to be incapable of implementing the network in
such a way that inexpensive access to the network increases rather than
decreases, then they should not be surprise if they are faced with
restrictive regulation.
