Corante



About this author

CORANTE

Arnold Kling has a Ph.D. in economics from MIT; founded homefair.com, one of the very first commercial websites, in 1994; separated from Homefair in January 2000 after it was sold to Homestore; is author of Under the Radar: Starting Your Internet Business without Venture Capital, and is an essayist. Send comments to us at econ@corante.com

Subscribe
Recent Comments

Recent Trackbacks

CATEGORIZED POSTS
Bottom Line Archives
Site Search



Powered by
Movable Type 3.2
Just Released the 2008 Tribalization of Business study - an in-depth look at how 140+ organizations are managing and measuring online communities
The Bottom Line

« Telephone Policy Debate | Main | Real Telecom Competition »

October 09, 2003

Werbach to the Future?

Email This Entry

Posted by Arnold

Kevin Werbach says that we don't need no stinkin' rules for using spectrum.


With advances in wireless technology, any set of rules that declares some forms of transmission acceptable and others unacceptable will be inefficient. Something that interferes today may not interfere tomorrow, as devices get smarter and more adaptive. So let's eliminate the rules, allow everyone to transmit however they wish, and use a liability system to deal with conflicts.

I can't say that I like the sound of that. Getting rid of property rights and then saying "let the court system handle it" strikes me as a recipe for mayhem. I definitely agree that today's property rights ("you have the right to broadcast television over this frequency, but not deliver cell phone calls") are antiquated. I do think that some other form of clearly-defined property rights are needed.

UPDATE: For a better reading on Werbach's ideas, see Regulate Hardware, not Ether.

Comments (1) | Category: telecom, FCC


COMMENTS

1. Kevin Werbach on October 9, 2003 04:43 PM writes...

We don't have to get rid of existing rights. I say in the article that the liability approach can operate in parallel with current frequency-based allocations. It can also work alongside the spectrum property rights that people like Tom Hazlett and Peter Huber advocate, though I have reservations about that approach. As for the court system, who do you think would referee disputes about "clearly-defined property rights?"

The Feature piece is a summary of a much more detailed law review article (draft at "http://werbach.com/research/supercommons.pdf) that will appear in the Spring.

Permalink to Comment


EMAIL THIS ENTRY TO A FRIEND

Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):




RELATED ENTRIES
test entry
Taking a Break
Moore's Law and Military Technology
Biotech and Sports
I'll take Ohio
Email Innovation?
99-cent rip-off
If Brad DeLong called me stupid