IP: Re: Re: Response to David Reed

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

> From: "Gerry Faulhaber" <gerry-faulhaber () home com>
> To: <farber () cis upenn edu>
> Subject: Re: Re: Response to David Reed
> Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:28:50 -0400
>
>
> I'm glad Mr. Berger is open to *some* use of markets and property rights.
> Let me clear up a few points in his post:
>
> Virtually no one who currently controls spectrum is permitted to share it,
> lease it, or sell it to anyone; furthermore, they can only use it for the
> express purpose (say, TV broadcasting) permitted in their license.  There is
> no market because no one is permitted to buy and sell licenses, or to use
> them for anything other than the original FCC mandate.  Them's the rules,
> and yes, they stink.  But to fault "TV/radio broadcasters for [not] being
> open to sharing or leasing their spectrum" ignores the FCC licensing rules;
> it would be illegal for them to do so.  This is not to say that the
> broadcasters *would* do it, if they had a chance; but so far they haven't
> had a chance.
>
> It may be that "monopolists don't ever want to share or lease" (I don't
> think this is actually true), but please tell me where the monopolist is in
> spectrum.  If we put spectrum ownership into private hands right now, there
> would be hundreds, maybe thousands of owners of spectrum, many of whom would
> be happy to sell or lease.  If the TV guys won't lease there will be plenty
> of people that will.  You don't need everyone who owns a good (a house, say,
> or a piece of the spectrum) to be willing to put it on the market, in order
> to have competition; all you need is enough owners willing to transact with
> the buyers.  And this is what price is all about: ensuring incentives to
> sell/rent/lease.  With enough sellers (but not necessarily everyone), the
> market will be competitive; there will be no monopoly.
>
> Many people seem to confuse "private property" with "monopoly;" not helpful.
> Please be careful when you use the term "monopoly;" make sure you can prove
> your case.



For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/