Scott Cleland

00Publius Contributor - Business - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

How the FCC Comcast Decision Limits Net Neutrality

August 29, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

Contrary to conventional wisdom, the FCC’s order on Comcast’s network management practices, reined in the net neutrality movement much more than it advanced their agenda. The old adage is true here, be careful what you ask for — FreePress/Public Knowledge.

At its rawest level, the chest-beating petitioners got the FCC to reiterate what the FCC has long said it would do, and also order Comcast to do what Comcast already publicly committed to do. When the dust settles and the rhetoric cools, the petitioners will better understand the old adage: be careful what you ask for.

In this instance, they hoped to advance their agenda for sweeping net neutrality legislation and regulation, and what they ended up with was the expert agency taking much of the wind out of their sails.

How does the FCC Comcast decision limit Net Neutrality?
Continue reading “How the FCC Comcast Decision Limits Net Neutrality”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

What 3Q earnings tell us about Google-Yahoo Antitrust Review

July 30, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

GOOG-YHOO earn ~100% of profits

With the 3Q08 earnings releases by Google, Yahoo and Microsoft in the last few days, DOJ antitrust investigators of the Google-Yahoo partnership now get their first fresh look at the most recent revenue and profit market shares for this market.

While many, including myself, have focused on the proxy market share measures of searches from ComScore, Nielsen and Hitwise to track Google’s relentless taking of share on a monthly basis, antitrust investigators will likely look past proxy search shares and focus on the truer and more accurate measures of market share–actual, reported revenues and profits.

There are strong reasons why antitrust investigators will shift from the market’s obsession with the monthly search share proxy figures to real financial numbers.

First, users do not pay for search, advertisers and website publishers do; this makes search share an indirect and less relevant measure of true market power.

Second, all searches are not equal, some lead to clicks and some clicks are dramatically more valuable than other clicks.

Third, the search shares are third-party proxy estimates based on samples; they are not auditable and accountable as publicly-reported financial data are; moreover, SARBOX requires CFOs/CEOs to personally sign that the finances are accurate, subject to severe penalties if they are proven to be fraudulent.

Continue reading “What 3Q earnings tell us about Google-Yahoo Antitrust Review”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Congress - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Technology

Why Google is the Biggest Threat to Americans’ Privacy:

July 25, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

The Detailed Case from my House Testimony

In my testimony Thursday on Internet privacy before Chairman Markey’s House Internet Subcommittee, I documented for Congress the detailed case of how Google, which is subject to no Federal privacy laws, is the single biggest threat to Americans’ privacy today.

The evidence assembled here shows how Google’s mission and culture are hostile to privacy, how Google’s unprecedented scale and scope enable a breath-taking collection of intimate “blackmail-able” information, and how Google’s track record is not worthy of trust.

From my testimony:

Case Study: How Google Systematically Threatens Americans’ Privacy

To begin, I am not alone in believing Google’s privacy practices are a particularly serious consumer protection problem.

  • Privacy watchdog, Privacy International, ranked Google worst in its world survey on privacy in 2007 and described Google as “hostile to privacy.”
  • EPIC, CDD, and USPIRG filed suit with the FTC last year challenging Google’s privacy practices as deceptive trade practices.

    *

  • Recently, a broad coalition of privacy advocates pressured Google to finally comply with California privacy law and put a link to their privacy policy on their home page.

First, Google’s mission is antithetical to privacy

Google’s megalomaniacal “mission is to organize the world’s information and make it accessible and useful.” Google’s mission is so uniquely antithetical to privacy–it actually warrants the creation of a new term: “publicacy.” Google’s unique and radical “publicacy” mission believes “the world’s information,” is (and should be) public not private. (Note the mission statement puts no qualifier on “information” other than “the world’s”.)
Continue reading “Why Google is the Biggest Threat to Americans’ Privacy:”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

Debunking the Google-Yahoo Antitrust Myths

July 20, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

In advance of the Senate and House antitrust hearings on Google-Yahoo, I thought it would be useful to debunk some of the primary antitrust Myths you will likely hear.

Myth #1:

There can’t be an antitrust problem as long as consumers are just one click away from a competitive search engine.

This is intentional misdirection. Google does not get paid by users, but by advertisers and websites. The antitrust concern here is not about “competition” for free search engine use, but competition for paid search advertising.

Google is exploiting the “Internet choice paradox” (PDF file) where because users have near infinite choices to reach Internet content, they assume content businesses must have as much choice in advertising to Internet users as users have in reaching content. They don’t.
Continue reading “Debunking the Google-Yahoo Antitrust Myths”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

Google’s Cerf floats trial balloon: “Why not nationalize the Internet?”

July 8, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

Google’s Internet Evangelist, Vint Cerf recently asked publicly: “Should the Internet be owned and maintained by the government, just like the highways?” according to a post by Erick Schonfeld on TechCrunch.

  • Since the Government neither owns or maintains the Internet today, Google may have much grander plans for ‘nationalizing the Internet’ than anybody appreciated.
  • Maybe we should take Google’s CEO Eric Schmidt much more seriously when he declares: “The goal of the company is not to monetize anything,” and “The goal is to change the world — and monetization is a technique to do that.”

Let’s dissect how radical and destructive Google’s notions for nationalizing the Internet are.
Continue reading “Google’s Cerf floats trial balloon: “Why not nationalize the Internet?””

00Publius Contributor - Business - Congress - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

Transcript of Lecture on Google, Net Neutrality, Monopolies, Click Fraud, Privacy

June 20, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

Unleashed: Transcript of Griffin/Cleland talk on Google, net neutrality, monopolies, click fraud, privacy

For those who like the written format, here is the transcript of ChipGriffin’s interview of me on all things Google.

The transcript is just below the podcast button to hear the interview.

This interview turned out to be one of the most comprehensive and in-depth discussions I have had on all things Google — that’s been captured for web listening or reading.
Continue reading “Transcript of Lecture on Google, Net Neutrality, Monopolies, Click Fraud, Privacy”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

Why a Lack of Openness Sullies the Integrity of Google’s Ad Auctions

June 9, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

Does Google warrant the current exceptional leap-of-faith in the integrity of its dominant ad auction model, given its near total lack of openness, transparency, independent auditability or third party oversight? There is a growing body of evidence that Google does not.

The New York Times article today by Miguel Helft, “The Human Hands behind the Google Money Machine,” is a must read for anyone following Google or concerned about the openness and transparency of public markets. It is also a little treasure trove of fresh information on Google.

Why a lack of openness sullies the integrity of Google’s ad auctions.

First, it is widely accepted that public markets operate best when open and transparent.

Google’s ad auction model has become one of the world’s most important public markets. Google is increasingly becoming the world’s primary public information broker. Google brokers:

  • Information for over 700 million search users worldwide, over three to six times their nearest rivals;
  • Advertisement placement for over a million advertisers several times more than their nearest competitors;
  • Monetization for over a million websites several times more than their nearest competitors.

Google is also not open or transparent.
Continue reading “Why a Lack of Openness Sullies the Integrity of Google’s Ad Auctions”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Congress - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

Can you trust Google to obey the rules? Is Google accountable to anyone?

June 4, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

In monitoring Google as closely as I do, it has become increasingly clear that Google does not believe it has to obey the rules, standards, regulations and laws that others routinely obey and respect. Google increasingly operates like a self-declared, virtual sovereign nation, largely unaccountable to the rules and mores of the rest of the world.

There is plentiful evidence of Google’s unaccountability; see the following analysis peppered generously with source links. The impetus for this analysis and documentation was Saul Hansel’s outstanding New York Times Blog: “Google fights for the right to hide its privacy policy.”

In a nutshell, Mr. Hansel spotlighted how Google is refusing to abide by the rule that its members must display a link to their privacy policy on their home page; and that this industry self-regulatory body is expected to bend its rules specifically to accomodate Google. This is not an isolated incident. Shirking the accountability that most everyone else respects is near standard operating procedure for Google.

Is Google accountable to anyone?
Continue reading “Can you trust Google to obey the rules? Is Google accountable to anyone?”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Congress - Democrats/Leftists - Google - Inernet - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

Why the EU’s concerned with a Google-Yahoo pact—Google is close to monopoly share in Europe

May 15, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

A Yahoo-Google search outsourcing pact arguably faces even more problems with European antitrust authorities than with the reported U.S. DOJ antitrust investigation, for two reasons:

First, this Yahoo-Google pact represents a horizontal market problem of collusion between leading direct search competitors; this is very different from the recent approval of the Google-DoubleClick merger, which was a vertical merger where DoubleClick was not found to be an actual direct competitor of Google. (Yahoo is universally viewed as one of Google’s top two direct competitors.)

Second, the market facts of search concentration in Europe put Google perilously close to the unofficial definition of a monopoly, which is 90% share of a market.
Continue reading “Why the EU’s concerned with a Google-Yahoo pact—Google is close to monopoly share in Europe”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Google - Inernet - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

Comcast-Pando Networks’ “P2P Bill of Rights and Responsibilities” solves multiple problems

April 23, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

In a breakthrough agreement and announcement (read the release at bottom), Comcast and Pando Networks, (the leading managed P2P content delivery service) agreed to:

  • Lead creation of a “P2P Bill of Rights and Responsibilities” for P2P users and ISPs; and
  • Create a process to better “share test methodologies and results” among all P2P providers and ISPs so everyone can:
  • Learn how P2P providers can optimize their applications for all types of networks; and
  • “More efficiently deliver legal content.”

This is a profoundly significant development because it solves multiple thorny problems:
Continue reading “Comcast-Pando Networks’ “P2P Bill of Rights and Responsibilities” solves multiple problems”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

Why “White Spaces” is just corporate welfare innovation

April 16, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

The Hill has a good article highlighting the growing “battle” over “White Spaces,” or the potential for use of the buffer spectrum bands in-between TV channels to ensure that there is no interference with TV signals.

What I want to spotlight here is how many in the tech industry seem to think they can carry the word-banner “innovation,” like the biblical Ark of the Covenant, to defeat anyone standing in the way of their quest for corporate welfare.

The Wireless Innovation Alliance, led by Google and its “Information Commons” poodles (the New America Foundation, FreePress, and Public Knowledge), has apparently suckered other tech companies (Microsoft, Dell and HP) into shielding and giving cover for Google’s broader information commons public policy agenda, which is needed in order for Google to fulfill it’s megalomaniacal mission “to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful.”

Moreover, many tech companies must think that “playing the innovation card” in Washington is like an all-you-can-eat ticket to feed at the public trough.

Let’s get down to brass tacks here.
Continue reading “Why “White Spaces” is just corporate welfare innovation”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

Google is not warning its users of its role in one of largest cyber-security breaches ever on the Net

April 6, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

USA Today broke a much under-appreciated and potentially blockbuster Internet security breach story: “Google searchers could end up with a new type of bug.” Kudos to Byron Acohido and Jon Swartz, who reported it in USA Today, and also blogged on it at ZeroDayThreat.com, a site for their book “Zero Day Threat” which defines a Zero Day Threat as “a threat so new that no viable protections against it exist.”

In a nutshell, the article and blog post explain how cybercrook hackers have figured out how to use and leverage Google’s search engine results “to spread spam, and carry out scams. Typically it also lets the attacker embed a keystroke logger, which collects and transmits your passwords and any other sensitive data you type online.”

This new cyber scam ring is expected to spread rapidly, increasing from a “few dozen major websites” today, to “hundreds of high-profile websites” in the next few weeks.

“…in March alone… security researchers found several hundred thousand corrupted Web pages returned in common Google search queries.”

Why this is a big deal?
Continue reading “Google is not warning its users of its role in one of largest cyber-security breaches ever on the Net”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

Why ultimate FCC decision on Comcast network management is expected to be unanimous

March 5, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

(See end of this email for bottom line on why there will be a unanimous FCC decision on Comcast’s network management practices.)

It’s obvious that there is much more that is uncertain than certain after listening to the five-hour FCC En Banc hearing at Harvard on the FreePress and Vuze petitions on Comcast’s network management practices.

Professor Tim Wu, who coined the term net neutrality, was a panelist and framed the Harvard spectacle in CNET as a “…trial of the Internet. … Comcast is in the docket accused of crimes against the public interest.”

Well if this was a trial, Wu/FreePress et al did not prove their case, and certainly did not prove it “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Only in the “make-it-up-as-you-go-along” world of net neutrality is it an alleged”crime against the public interest” for an ISP to protect the quality of service for many users by imperceptively delaying the packet delivery of non-time sensitive applications for a few users.

FCC Commissioner Tate got all the first panelists to agree that there was a baseline need for “reasonable network management.” Even Professor Wu conceded that there was “good discrimination and bad discrimination,” just like there is “good cholestorol and bad cholestorol.”

Then the specific question before the FCC: was Comcast “reasonable” in its network management of p2p traffic in this instance?
Continue reading “Why ultimate FCC decision on Comcast network management is expected to be unanimous”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Technology

Bursting its own stock bubble: Why Google is its own worst enemy

February 12, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

Since the beginning of the year, Google’s stock has fallen over 25%–about 2-3 times the fall of the relevant indexes.

The good news for Google shareholders is that most all of Google’s stock price problems are self-inflicted, so they could fix them—if they wanted to.

The bad news for Google shareholders is that Google is unlikely to change its problematic bahavior—because “leopards don’t change their spots.”

Why is Google its own worst enemy?

First, Google routinely alienates its friends and allies.

The New York Times editorial board, which should be a natural ideological ally, busted Google badly in its editorial today: “Who’s the 800-Pound Gorilla?”

The NYT saw through Google’s anti-competitive complaints about Microsoft-Yahoo, labeling them as”self-serving,” “disingenuous,” and “so much empty whining.”

Google has badly alienated its shareholders (it’s most ardent believers) who wanted to believe that Google would reward them for their investment.

Despite Google’s torrid revenue growth (51%) for a company its size, investors are learning that Google already has spending plans for whatever revenue that comes in.
Continue reading “Bursting its own stock bubble: Why Google is its own worst enemy”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Google - Inernet - News - Scott Cleland - Technology

FTC paved way for approval of Microsoft-Yahoo in approving Google-DoubleClick 4-1

February 11, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

I can’t say I’m at all surprised to see Microsoft seek to acquire Yahoo.

It makes obvious business sense for both Microsoft and Yahoo — it is the only viable and strategic option for either company to become a serious and credible competitor to Google-DoubleClick’s rapidly increasing dominance of search and Internet advertising.

And given the FTC’s surprisingly strong consolidation-endorsing analysis of the Google-DoubleClick merger — previously-perceived as a yellow antitrust light to such a merger by Microsoft — there is now a bright blinking green light for approval.

Timing-wise, it’s obvious to Microsoft to get approval now while the getting is so good.

Moreover, Yahoo’s faltering stock begged Microsoft to “Come on down! and play ‘The Price is Right!'”

Essentially, the FTC paved the road for antitrust approval of a Microsoft-Yahoo combination with its recent 4-1 approval of Google-DoubleClick.

The FTC ruled definitively two months ago that the Internet advertising market has “vigorous” competition, which “will likely increase.”
Continue reading “FTC paved way for approval of Microsoft-Yahoo in approving Google-DoubleClick 4-1”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Technology

Google’s Regulatory Outlook 2008

January 29, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

The big question for investors is why?

Why has Google felt the need to build up a new lobbying operation in D.C. (rivaling Microsoft’s in size) so rapidly and why did Google just unveil, with great fanfare, its new cutting-edge office space in DC with a party that attracted 650 people and many VIPs?

What does Google know that investors may not?

Google’s Regulatory Outlook

Federal Trade Commission:

Antitrust:

  • In gaining the 4-1 FTC approval of the DoubleClick acquisition, Google earned a probationary warning from the FTC: “We want to be clear however, that we will closely watch these markets and, should Google engage in unlawful tying or other anti-competitive conduct, the Commission intends to act quickly.”
  • Both the Democratic Chair and Ranking Republican of the Senate Judiciary Committee overseeing the FTC now believe: “Antitrust regulators need to be wary to guard against the creation of a powerful Internet conglomerate able to extend its market power in one market to adjacent markets, to the detriment of competition and consumers.”
  • Many in Washington now fear Google may be becoming the next Microsoft.
  • The EU still must approve the Google-Doubleclick merger by spring. Google’s market concentration is much greater in Europe than in the US and the EU has much more legal latitude to block or condition a merger than the FTC does. The EU approval hurdle is more difficult than the FTC’s was.
  • Overall, this is not a good precondition for Google to enter 2008. It is especially not good, if there is a Democratic Administration in 2009, because Democrats generally believe that this Administration has been too lax on competition and antitrust matters.

Privacy:
Continue reading “Google’s Regulatory Outlook 2008”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Google - Inernet - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology - The Law

Net Neutrality Blocks Innovation

January 17, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

Why net neutrality would block cloud computing innovation; computers must prioritize/schedule apps

It’s becoming increasingly obvious that net neutrality proponents have not thought through the logical and practical implications of their call for mandating net neutrality.

Practically, net neutrality is about codifying Internet architecture design rules for the first time, which would have the real world effect of blocking, degrading, and impairing innovation towards allowing the Internet to support “cloud computing” — the future of computing according to Google, IBM and many others.

Why does net neutrality theory not work in practice?

First, net neutrality is really backward-looking, trying to take the Internet back to the dial-up/pre-broadband days when there was monopoly telecom regulation and not inter-modal broadband competition like there is today.

Second, consider net neutrality’s definition by its primary proponents:
Continue reading “Net Neutrality Blocks Innovation”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Google - Inernet - News - Scott Cleland - Technology - Uncategorized

Busted again! Google ranked worst!

December 13, 2007 by

-By Scott Cleland

Google ranked worst in “One World Trust” survey on openness and transparency

The Financial Times reported that One World Trust is publishing the results of a new world survey that ranks Google worst in the world on openness and transparency.

This worst in the world ranking comes on the heels of a recent Privacy International survey that also found that Google was worst in the world on privacy. Now two independent and respected non-governmental groups have independently found that Google is worst in the world on the values that it claims are very important to the company: openness and privacy.

One World Trust “conducts research on practical ways to make global organisations more responsive to the people they affect, and on how the rule of law can be applied equally to all. It educates political leaders and opinion-formers about the findings of its research.”

  • Out of a possible score of 100 Google got a 17. Ouch. Even the math whizes at Google can see that is not a good score.
  • And since the top performer, UNDP, got an 88, there is no grading curve that will save Google’s bacon on this one.

It is good to get additional third party confirmation of many of the themes I have been blogging about for over a year and a half related to Google. A central theme I have harped on is Google’s hypocrisy and double standard: where it has one standard of behavior it expects of others and another for itself.

The most galling has been its push for “open” access and net neutrality for its broadband competitors but not for Google — even though Google has more market share in its market than the competitive broadband industry has.
Continue reading “Busted again! Google ranked worst!”

00Publius Contributor - Budget - Google - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology - Uncategorized

Senators Kohl/Hatch write FTC on Google-Doubleclick merger — conclude Google has market power

November 30, 2007 by

-By Scott Cleland

The top Senators overseeing antitrust matters, Senate Antitrust Subcommittee Chairman Herb Kohl (D-WI) and Ranking Republican Member Orrin Hatch (R-UT), wrote a strong letter to the FTC urging serious scrutiny of the Google-DoubleClick merger (see pasted copy of the letter at the bottom of this article).

Having testified before their Senate Subcommittee in opposition to the merger September 27th, I was gratified to learn of the subcommittee’s serious bipartisan concern about the merger and also their very strong grasp of the potential anti-competitive issues arising from the merger.

There are three big takeaways from the letter.

First, the Subcommittee defines the relevant market as Internet advertising: “…combining these two companies’ leading positions in these two forms of Internet advertising could cause significant harm to competition in the Internet advertising marketplace.”
Continue reading “Senators Kohl/Hatch write FTC on Google-Doubleclick merger — conclude Google has market power”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology - Uncategorized

Google’s wireless folly? or hubris?

November 26, 2007 by

-By Scott Cleland

The WSJ article, “Google has even bigger plans for mobile phones,” appropriately addresses the big “open” question of whether Google is serious about becoming a wireless carrier, because if it is, it will need to bid and win substantial spectrum in the upcoming FCC 700 MHz spectrum auction.

The WSJ article states: “the behind-the-scenes moves illustrate just how serious the Internet giant is about trying to reshape the wireless world.” The evidence in favor of Google’s serious entry into wireless is significant, as Google:

  • Successfully extracted unprecedented FCC auction rules that would favor Google’s advertising business model over the existing wireless subscription model, and that would likely depress the business utility of the spectrum so Google could acquire it at below market value;
  • (Google understands it broke a lot of china at the FCC and in Washington this summer in order to win the “Google spectrum concessions.” Hopefully, Google also understands it would be more than bad form to slap the hand that tries to feed you, by not bidding on the band specially tailored for Google’s model.)
  • Has repeatedly pledged it would bid almost $5B in the auction;
  • Acquired a test wireless license, built towers and is operating a wireless service at its headquarters using “googley” phones;
  • Has hired game theorists to game out its strategy;
  • “Discovered Wall Street was enthusiastic about the company’s ability to raise any needed cash;”
  • (Truly amazing that Wall Street bankers would in fact loan a company money that already has ~$10B in cash in the bank and the number one brand in the world. Good for Google for clearing up that big uncertainty…) and
  • Had discussions with a variety of potential partners like Clearwire, but is reportedly likely to go it alone to maximize its bidding flexibility.

Let me add another reason that the Googlers may bid: EGO. Googlers believe they are the smartest of the smart, and they must be drawn to the challenge and complexity of this “high-level chess game” in auction game theory. What better forum to showcase their intellectual, algorithmic, and business acumen superiority?
Continue reading “Google’s wireless folly? or hubris?”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Congress - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Technology - Uncategorized

A Bogus Attack on Cable Giant, Comcast

November 9, 2007 by

-By Scott Cleland

Bogus petition against Comcast’s reasonable network management is a back door ploy to reinstate common carriage for broadband

The Moveon.org/FreePress petition to the FCC to declare Comcast’s reasonable network management illegal is a deceptive back-door scheme to reverse FCC deregulation of broadband as an information service and to (de facto) reinstate common carriage for broadband.

The petition will be found to be a bogus and manufactured scheme to deceive the FCC and the public that necessary, responsible, and “reasonable network management” — that serves consumers and the Internet public by delivering quality of service and protecting consumers from the harm of viruses, spam etc. — should be declared illegal “degrading” of an Internet application.

Upon full FCC airing of this issue, it will be clear that the offending P2P application traffic is the culprit that is in fact harming the overwhelming majority of Internet consumers by “degrading and impairing” the responsiveness and utility of the Internet for the many because of the irresponsible bandwidth hogging of the few.

First, if managing out-of-control p2p traffic that is degrading and impairing the responsiveness and utility of the Internet for the many by the few is not “reasonable network management,” then no network management is reasonable.

The petitioners have made a grave error in choosing to put all their “eggs in one basket,” defending spiraling p2p traffic, because there is probably no more widespread “rotten” Internet application than most p2p traffic.
Continue reading “A Bogus Attack on Cable Giant, Comcast”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - News - Scott Cleland - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - Uncategorized

Unanimous Internet Tax Ban proves Net Neutrality is outside the political mainstream

November 4, 2007 by

-By Scott Cleland

The unanimous passage of a new seven-year Internet Tax Moratorium, is powerful evidence of how far out of the political mainstream the net neutrality movement is.

The fact that everyone in Congress, from the right and the left, came together and supported extending the Internet tax ban for twice as long as Congress did in the past, proves unequivocally that political consensus is possible in Congress on mainstream Internet issues.

Moreover, the near unanimous passage of the 1996 Telecom Act by Congress was another powerful example of how the left and right could come together and agree overwhelmingly on sound Internet/communications policies like:

“…preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for the Internet… unfettered by Federal or state regulation;”

and

“To promote competition and reduce regulation in order to secure lower prices and higher quality services for America telecommunications consumers and encourage the rapid deployment of new telecommunications technologies.”

Sound mainstream policies can attract near unanimity in Congress — despite rampant partisanship.
Continue reading “Unanimous Internet Tax Ban proves Net Neutrality is outside the political mainstream”

00Publius Contributor - Crime - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology - Uncategorized

Ultimate Internet gatekeeper?

October 14, 2007 by

-By Scott Cleland

Imagine one company was allowed to become the world’s de facto editorial filter by which Internet content gets found, the only revenue collector for most Web sites and the dominant gatekeeper for any business seeking to reach Internet users and Web sites. Imagine further that one company had “private dossiers” on most all Internet users that could, with substantial accuracy, tell the company any individual’s religion, politics, health status, income level, sexual preference, gender, age and personal secrets — and had an economic incentive to secretly exploit those individuals’ private information for financial gain. Finally, imagine that company had little accountability to consumers, competition, regulators, or independent third-party oversight.

One doesn’t have to imagine this company at all, because these are the very real stakes in the merger review of the pending Google-DoubleClick transaction by the antitrust authorities at the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and the European Commission. While most everyone knows Google as the worlds most popular search engine and leading brand, few are familiar with privately-owned DoubleClick, which is the behind-the-scenes global leader in serving online ads to Web sites around the world. These antitrust reviews will determine if combining the No. 1 and No. 2 global networks of Internet advertisers, Web sites and viewers would be anti-competitive.
Continue reading “Ultimate Internet gatekeeper?”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - The Law - Uncategorized

My Senate Judiciary Testimony why the Google-DoubleClick merger should be blocked

October 4, 2007 by

-By Scott Cleland

Below is the summary of my testimony before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust yesterday on why the Google-DoubleClick merger should be blocked.

  • I find the Google-DoubleClick merger review process to be one of the most illuminating and fascinating ways to explore the future of the business of the Internet.
  • I also strongly believe the trajectory of Internet content business will be profoundly affected by the outcome of this merger review.
  • I highly recommend you review the six charts I prepared which provide a very useful visual overview of why this merger is so far-reaching, little understood and important.
  • My full testimonywhite paper, “Googleopoly” can be found at www.googleopoly.net.

Summary of Testimony of Scott Cleland, President, Precursor LLCBefore the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee On Antitrust Hearing on: “Google-DoubleClick Merger and the Online Advertising Industry” — September 27, 2007
Continue reading “My Senate Judiciary Testimony why the Google-DoubleClick merger should be blocked”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Media Bias - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology - Uncategorized

How Google systematically misrepresents its services as “free”

September 5, 2007 by

-By Scott Cleland

Google openly represents its value in the marketplace as supplying users with “free” services: free search, free email, free docs/spreadsheet/other applications, free content, etc.

Google likes to represent itself as the de facto “Internet Santa Claus” — who only gives and never takes.

However, remember what we were taught as kids, “don’t take candy from strangers” and “…if it looks too good to be true, it is.”

Google is no charity.

Let’s pull back the superficial and populist veneer of Google’s candyman persona –to learn the systematic misrepresentation of Google’s “free” services — by better understanding the real-life “costs” that Google users in fact “pay” to Google.

Don’t be fooled that because actual money does not change hands that Google services are “free”. They are no more “free” than any other unofficial barter arrangement is “free”. Make no mistake, in every Google service, users do indeed “pay” for the service — it just is not clear or obvious to the user what thing of value they are giving/paying Google in return for the represented “free” service.

Let me explain the deceptive ways Google extracts non-monetary value, or gets “paid” from users in return for Google’s alleged “free” services.
Continue reading “How Google systematically misrepresents its services as “free””

00Publius Contributor - Congress - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Education - Media Bias - Scott Cleland - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - Uncategorized

America’s Unique Internet Success

March 11, 2007 by

-By Scott Cleland

A tech legislative priority of congressional Democrats, “net neutrality,” threatens America’s unique Internet success, because it would reverse America’s 11-year, bipartisan policy to promote competition and not regulate the Internet.

Democratic presidential candidates Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, are co-sponsors of Dorgan-Snowe (S.215), a net neutrality bill that for the first time would mandate broadband provide equal treatment to all Internet content. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also supports net neutrality as does House Telecom Subcommittee Chairman Ed Markey, who plans a series of hearings soon to promote net neutrality legislation.

To justify massive new government intervention in the Internet marketplace, Democrats are busily manufacturing a “broadband crisis” and an “Internet blocking problem” that simply does not exist. Policymaking by false premise is always dangerous. It’s downright irresponsible when it threatens to undermine the unregulated Internet, one of the key engines of our nation’s economic and productivity growth.
Continue reading “America’s Unique Internet Success”

00Publius Contributor - Congress - Constitution - Economy/Finances - Media Bias - Scott Cleland - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - The Law - Uncategorized

Why Net Neutrality Matters

March 7, 2007 by 1 Comment

-By Scott Cleland

Conservatives who care about free markets and limited government need to get smart and engaged on the biggest future threat to the Reagan/Thatcher/Friedman legacy of deregulation.

The Internet is the greatest deregulation and privatization success of all time.

However, the liberal net roots, led by Moveon.org, vehemently disagree and are pushing radical legislation and new net regulation that they’ve cleverly branded “net neutrality” to allegedly have the government “save the Internet” from competitive broadband providers.

  • Net neutrality is basically a “socialized Internet.”
  • Senators Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Edwards, and Speaker Pelosi, and Rep Markey, all support this new net regulation, genuflecting to Moveon.org’s power in the Democratic primaries.
  • Google, whose employees donated 98% to Democrats in the last cycle, is the corporate ringleader for regulating the net in order to freeze in place their current competitive advantages.

Our website www.NetCompetition.org provides a wealth of material on the issue and some very good one-pagers. Since we are so confident we are right on the issue we are the only site to include links to both sides of the debate.

The best single page explanation of what it’s all about can be seen here:Net Neutrality in One Page.
Continue reading “Why Net Neutrality Matters”