Tutorial offered on Trinko v. Verizon

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

> Delivered-To: dfarber+ () ux13 sp cs cmu edu
> Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2003 06:32:37 -0400
> From: Daniel Berninger <dan () danielberninger com>
> Subject: Tutorial offered on Trinko v. Verizon
> To: dave () farber net
>
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> The oral arguments in the Trinko v. Verizon antitrust case will take place
> at the US Supreme Court next Tuesday, October 14, 2003
>
> This is the most important telecom antitrust case in the last 25 years.  I
> have attached details of a nocost tutorial taking place via conference
> bridge next Monday, October 13, 2003 that might be of interest to your
> readers.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Dan
> ....................................
> Daniel Berninger
> e: dan () danielberninger com
> i: 12908 (fwd)
> v: +1.202.250.3428 (vonage)
> w: www.intercommunication.org
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> TRINKO V. VERIZON TUTORIAL OFFERED - MONDAY, OCTOBER 13th
>
> US Supreme Court Oral Arguments in Trinko v. Verizon - October 14, 2003
>
> Press conference call-in, 1:00-2:00 p.m. ET, Monday, October 13, 2003
> (contact dan () danielberninger com for call-in details)
>
> Washington, DC - October 8, 2003 - Tutorial planned on issues addressed by
> Trinko v. Verizon which has oral arguments scheduled before the US Supreme
> Court on Tuesday, October 14, 2003.  Expert panel available for questions
> after brief introductory remarks.
>
> WHO:
> Panel -
>     Daniel Berninger, Author, "Broken Trust: Rise & Fall of the Bell System"
>      - http://www.danielberninger.com
>     Roy Katriel, Partner, The Katriel Law Firm
>      - http://www.katriellaw.com
>     Chris Savage, Partner, Cole, Raywid, & Braverman
>      - http://www.crblaw.com
>
> WHEN:
> 1:00-2:00 p.m. ET, Monday October 13, 2003
>
> BACKGROUND:
> The current business landscape parallels nearly exactly the business
> conditions that gave rise to antitrust complaints and the breakup of AT&T
> in the 70's and 80's.
>
> The Bell companies have revived many of the techniques AT&T leveraged to
> defend and expand its monopoly. In particular, the Bell companies claim as
> AT&T did that pervasive regulation and pricing established through the
> tariff process makes them immune to antitrust complaints.
>
> Trinko v. Verizon addresses whether the existence of the Telecom Act of
> 1996 means the Bell companies enjoy antitrust immunity.
>
> AT&T spent $360 million to protect its monopoly and the Bell companies
> could afford to do the same, but, ultimately, the courts forced a
> settlement that broke up AT&T and unleashed dramatic growth in
> telecommunications, as well as, made the birth of the commercial Internet
> possible.
>
> The breakup of AT&T followed not long after the Supreme Court decided
> against the Bell System claims of antitrust immunity in 1978 in a case very
> similar to Trinko v. Verizon.
>
> See briefs on Trinko v. Verizon at -
> http://www.pulver.com/antitrustreport/research.html
>
> VIA CONFERENCE BRIDGE:
> Contact Daniel Berninger, dan () danielberninger com or 202.250.3428, for
> call-in details
>
> ABOUT INTERCOMMUNICATION.ORG
> This website serves as the home for a book project -
> "intercommunication, communication without a telephone company"
> I will post developing ideas, research, feedback, sample chapters, as well
> as, track the campaign to get the book published. The book documents the end
> of monopoly telecom emancipating the communicating public. The World Wide
> Web made everyone a publisher. VoIP gives end users control over voice
> communication. The telecom monopolists don't readily accept their
> obsolescence, so a battle between old and new ensues.

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/