| | |
|
NikolaosVolanisFirstPaper 8 - 23 Mar 2010 - Main.NikolaosVolanis
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper%25" |
|---|
ready for review | | | Notwithstanding the validity of the arguments for a competitive Net, focusing solely on a discussion on whether net neutrality regulation will help boost competition and broadband development bypasses the prior question whether discriminatory access could be constitutionally allowed as an alternative, particularly considering that traffic shaping technology essentially passes powers to control freedom of expression into private hands, without the constitutional protections that govern public authority intervention and censorship. By focusing mainly on empirical positivist economic argumentation, we miss the wider picture: that the meaning of network neutrality is explicitly normative and political, and as such, it is imbued with constitutional guarantees.
Wireless Communications | |
<
< | A different situation exists in the wireless communications market, which is still regulated on the basis of scarcity of available spectrum, which, in turn, it is based on century-old engineering assumptions using oscillation as a single engineering approach for wireless transmission of multiple messages. New communication technologies, however, have allowed us to use multiple parameters instead of one to separate radio messages, since nowadays radio transmitters can transmit at the same frequency without interfering with each other and without confusing the receivers. In professor Benkler's words: "Just like automobiles that can share a commons-based medium - the road - and unlike railroad cars, which must use dedicated, owned and managed railroad tracks - these new radios could share "the spectrum" as a commons" (Benkler, p. 88). | >
> | Setting aside the problem of network neutrality in the mobile services industry, an additional problem arises from regulatory restraints on the use of spectrum, since the latter is still regulated as a scarce resource, a notion based on century-old engineering assumptions using oscillation as a single engineering approach for wireless transmission of multiple messages. New communication technologies, however, have allowed us to use multiple parameters instead of one to separate radio messages, since nowadays radio transmitters can transmit at the same frequency without interfering with each other and without confusing the receivers. In professor Benkler's words: "Just like automobiles that can share a commons-based medium - the road - and unlike railroad cars, which must use dedicated, owned and managed railroad tracks - these new radios could share "the spectrum" as a commons" (Benkler, p. 88). | | | In addition, in a mentality similar to that of volunteer/distributed computing and p2p file-sharing, where users share their resources (in one case computational power, in the other case, storage and files), users can also share the excess capacity of sophisticated radio transceivers to increase capacity and connectivity of a network. This "cooperation gain" - that is, the improved quality of a system gained when the nodes cooperate - may be considered as a prominent base for capacity scaling, and it is heavily used in "mesh networks", in which nodes help each other forward messages and decipher incoming messages from the cloud of radio emissions. | | | As to Stephanie's point. isn't the FCC considering striking down the iPhone's exclusive contract with AT&T as a monopoly? http://arstechnica.com/telecom/news/2009/08/fcc-launches-three-pronged-probe-into-wireless-industry.ars
-- JulianBaez - 15 Mar 2010 | |
>
> |
Dear Stephanie,
Thanks for the comment, it is much appreciated. What you point out is absolutely true: The mobile telephony industry is definitely in a worse position than the fixed telephony industry vis-a-vis consumer choice and the 4 freedoms of net neutrality (the example of Verizon where you buy a phone that is useless in any other network is to me the epitome of consumer lock-up). The reason that I completely disregarded this issue in this paper was solely because I attempted to emphasize on the fact that restraints to the freedom to receive information may come from both private parties and the government. But as you rightfully point it out, I should probably make a brief note that the issue of net neutrality present in the wireless debate too.
-- NikolaosVolanis - 23 Mar 2010
Dear Julian,
Thanks for your comment. Indeed, the analogy you point out makes sense, since the issue of access to essential services seems to pop up in all network services industries. With regard to the telecom sector, this issue has been tackled by legislators by setting the minimum standards for "universal service" in order to make sure that all consumers enjoy access to basic quality (or "quality" - I guess this is a matter of definition) electronic communications services.
-- NikolaosVolanis - 23 Mar 2010 | | |
|
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |