Phoenix Center 'Doesn't Get' It, Free Press Says
An anti-Communications Act Title II policy group's arguments that the FCC can't easily forbear to create a “Title II Light” in dealing with net neutrality are “word games designed to confuse the issues,” Free Press Policy Director Matt Wood emailed…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
us. Because the FCC has denied forbearance in cases involving monopolies, and has found that ISPs are “terminating monopolies,” it can't easily use forbearance to mitigate reclassification, said the Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal & Economic Public Policy Studies in a study released Monday (see 1411030046). The study’s authors “either don’t get or willfully obscure the difference between a ‘terminating access monopoly’ and a monopoly or duopoly when it comes to retail consumers," Wood said. "So the Phoenix Center continues its crusade to erase the difference between the terms ‘terminating access monopoly’ and ‘dominant carrier,’ and ignores the fact that the Commission has forborne early and often from Title II requirements for wireless voice carriers, CLECs, enterprise broadband providers, and other communications providers with terminating access monopolies."