[10525] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: bill text draft 2: Telecommunications Competition Act (fwd)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jeffrey Sterling)
Sat Feb 26 14:11:38 1994
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 1994 22:42:24 -0800 (PST)
From: Jeffrey Sterling <jeffgs@netcom.com>
To: Barry Shein <bzs@world.std.com>
Cc: horn%temerity@leia.polaroid.com, com-priv@psi.com,
In-Reply-To: <199401250636.AA09490@world.std.com>
On Tue, 25 Jan 1994, Barry Shein wrote:
>
> Ok, one comment:
>
> From: Jeffrey Sterling <jeffgs@netcom.com>
> >Cable industry intends to preclude access of newspapers, TV stations,
> >radio stations, community content providers, etc. I'm interested in
> >universal access for commercial content providers.
>
> Here's an exercise I'd like you to try:
>
> List several major regulated industries, telephone, cable, automobile,
> railroad, etc.
Ok, ok. Lets see how about the telephone/cable/computer/movie/interactive
TV industry.
> Now list the major companies you associate with each of those
> industries.
>
Gee, how about TCI/Bell Atlantic, US West/Time Warner, ATT/McCaw Cellular.
> Now add up the percentage marketshare those few represent.
>
> For example:
>
Industry: Interactive Multimedia
Major Companies: BellAtl/TCI, USWest/TimeW, ATT/MCc
Total Market Share (US): I dunno, around 85%?
>
> Now list the smaller community players who have benefited in each of
> those industries:
>
Industry: Interactive Multimedia
Smaller, Local Community Players: Um, er, hmmm.
> ok, now ask yourself if there is possibly any relationship evident
> here.
Gee I think so, large regulated megacorporations profiting from
monopolies that allow them to spend billions in unregulated industries.
They profit by controlling the infrastructure and owning the content and
excluding or overpricing other's content.
> Now, as a comparison, let's take one of the most unregulated
> industries in the United States: Newspapers.
>
Newspapers ala Rupert Murdock => William Randolph Hearst also profitted
from creating media monopolies of their time. And newspapers today still
control the content and spin that we are exposed to every day.
My thesis is that the cost of bandwidth ought to be dropping in direct
proportion to the rate at which computers are getting smaller and faster.
Cheap, flat rate digital transport ought to be delivering ethernet to the
doorstep with no long distance charges for the cost of regular phone
service. The Reason this has not occurred is no competition in the local
loop for telephone or cable.
If you can explain a way to have completely deregulated telephone and
cable competition in local exchange areas (please be at least as specific
as we have been) that is feasible and practicle today please do so.
Otherwise I argue that using a commercial network access point (CNAPs)
model is the best approach to induce free market competition in the
interactive multimedia world of the future without giving it away to the
megacorporations.
The proliferation of computers and now computers in set
tops is a compelling argument to decentralize the production of content,
away from Hollywood, NYC, Wahington DC and put it in the hands of
communities that can barter, share information, and sell content to other
communities.
Can you explain the difference between an asymetrical, sychronous network
and a symetrical, asychronous network from the perspective of a
vertically integrated multmedia mega corporation like TCI/Bell Atlantic?
Which one are they designing today? Why?
This will not happen if knowledgable people such us yourself roll over and
let these megacorporations have their way.
> I think some illusions need to be shattered here, badly.
Some serious illusions are exist if you can't see there is no free market
in a world where two corporations control 80% (maybe) of the local loop
traffic in a totally regulated market and are getting to have their cake
and eat it too!!!
Jeffrey Sterling
Complex Systems Engineer/Graduate West Point of Capitalism
jeffgs@netcom.com
voice 206 368-7679
