IP: Re: Who Wants to Be a Monopoly?

[Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

> Date: Sun, 28 May 2000 10:48:30 -0600
> To: farber () cis upenn edu, ip-sub-1 () majordomo pobox com
> From: Brett Glass <brett () lariat org>
> Subject: Re: IP: Who Wants to Be a Monopoly?
>
> At 08:03 AM 5/28/2000, Dave Farber wrote:
>
> > > http://www.nytimes.com/library/magazine/home/20000528mag-wordimage.html
> >
> > WORD & IMAGE BY MAX FRANKEL
> > Who Wants to Be a Monopoly?
> > Beware the media moguls who hog both medium and message.
>
> The author of this piece echoes a strategy which I've been advocating
> for several years: separate control of monopoly infrastructure from
> the services and content that "ride" upon it.
>
> For example, if local telphone infrastructure -- the "last mile" --
> were owned by a company whose sole business were renting that last
> mile of wire, it would have a strong incentive to rent that
> infrastructure to all comers rather than hoarding it so as to
> provide vertically integrated services. We'd have friendly --
> in fact, eager -- landlords rather than hostile monopolies seeking
> to prevent competition. Ditto in the cable business: there would
> be no issues regarding open access if the cable plant were open
> to all comers.
>
> The Federal Communications act of 1996 -- which was promoted, in
> fact, by the ILECS -- was flawed in that it created an environement
> in which it was not in the best interest of the most powerful players
> to allow competition. And, alas, in which those players could quash
> competition. It is time to learn from this failure and do the right
> thing.
>
> --Brett Glass