FILTER BY SCHOLARAll Scholars
- The following scholars have published material in this field
FILTER BY RELEVANCEMost Recent
FILTER BY CONTENT TYPEAll Content Types
In this event, the second in AEI’s series “The Disrupters,” the audience will have a unique opportunity to hear from, and interact with, Jeff Pulver on issues such as regulation, the digital economy, and the future of communications.
Is any flavor of Title II legal? Is it workable in a complex environment like the Internet? And why would we attempt such a risky change when the Internet is flourishing?
How do you make a Microsoft or a Facebook? Do the “disrupters” of the world possess innate qualities that drive their ideas to the top? Does luck determine a startup’s success, or is there a magic formula innovators can follow to ensure their efforts are...
Net neutrality is crony capitalism pure and simple – an effort by one group of private interests to enrich itself at the expense of another group by using the power of the state.
Eisenach's testimony streeses thee main points: net neutrality regulation cannot be justified on grounds of enhancing consumer welfare; the potential costs of net neutrality regulation are sweeping and severe; and legitimate policy concerns about the potential use of market power can best be addressed through existing antitrust and consumer protection laws and regulations.
In mid-September, AEI’s Center for Internet, Communications, and Technology Policy and the University of Nebraska College of Law will cosponsor a three-day conference at the Federal Communications Commission to highlight the latest academic thinking on broadband regulation and to give regulators the opportunity to interact with leading scholars in the field.
Net neutrality advocates in the U.S. are only giving you part of the picture, and making the future look far more grim than it really is. We should call "Internet Slow Down Day" "Internet Reality Check Day" instead.
Two policy proposals on "net neutrality" have emerged: a light regulatory approach or subjecting ISPs and the rest of the Internet value chain to Title II of the Communications Act — meaning monopoly telephone era, utility style regulation.
Because there is almost not evidence that actual content blocking, support for Title II is based on the purely theoretical notion that such laws are needed to prevent broadband providers from doing so, not on reality.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to your inquiry on an update of the Communications Act. Your latest inquiry asks the public to comment specifically on the question of peering and interconnection in communications markets, and on the role of government in regulating these agreements.
We welcome you to join us for a panel discussion of the undersea military competition occurring in Asia and what it means for the United States and its allies.
AEI’s Election Watch is back! Please join us for two sessions of the longest-running election program in Washington, DC.
We welcome you to join us at AEI for a discussion of what’s next for the Common Core.
Please join AEI for a discussion examining each candidate’s platform and prospects for victory and the impact that a possible shift toward free-market policies in Brazil might have on South America as a whole.