LINE, INTERNET HAS FEWER RULES.
SO THERE YOU GOVERNMENT.
NEIL: THANK YOU, MY FRIEND,
CORNELL McSHANE.
FORMER FCC COMMISSIONER ROBERT
McDOWELL WITH US TO REACT TO
ALL OF THIS.
COMMISSIONER, WHAT DO YOU MAKE
OF THIS.
>> THE RULES ARE NOT GOING AWAY.
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT GETS
REPEATED OVER AND OVER IN NEWS
STORIES.
WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE REVERTING
BACK TO THE CLINTON-GORE LEGAL
FRAMEWORK.
WHERE THE FEDERAL TRADE
COMMISSION AND DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE STILL POLICE
ANTI-COMPETITIVE CONDUCT UNDER
THE CLAYTON ACT, THE SHERMAN
ACT, THE FEDERAL TRADE
COMMISSION ACT.
INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS CAN'T
CHARGE YOU UNCOMPETITIVE RATES,
ANTI-COMPETITIVE EXCLUSIVE TYPE
CHARGES FOR FASTER SERVICE THAT
WOULD HARM COMPETITION.
THEY CAN'T DOT BLOCKING AND
THROTTLING.
THAT IS ALWAYS ALLEGED WITH
THESE STORIES.
IT GETS VERY FRUSTRATING TO HEAR
TIME AND AGAIN --
NEIL: CAN THEY CHOOSE WHICH
CERTAIN MATERIAL IS DOWNLOADED
TO YOU?
>> NOT IN ANTI-COMPETITIVE WAY,
NO.
DOING SOMETHING EXCLUSIVE,
FAVORITISM, ONE INTERNET SERVICE
PROVIDER HAVING A FAVORED
CONTENT PROVIDER, PER SE IS
VIOLATION OF ANTITRUST LAW.
WHY BEFORE FEBRUARY 26th OF
2015, BEFORE THESE TITLE 2 RULES
THAT HAVE BEEN DUMPED DOWN TO BE
CALLED NET NEUTRALITY, BEFORE
THEY WERE IN PLACE, THAT IS WHY
ENTREPRENEURIAL EXPLOSION OF
BRILLIANCE THROUGHOUT THE
INTERNET ECOSPHERE, AN IDEA
HATCHED IN THE DORM ROOM COULD
BE ONE OF THE WORLD'S LARGEST
COMPANIES.
WHY WAS THAT?
LEGAL REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
THERE, LOW BARRIERS TO ENTRY AND
ALL MARKET CONDITIONS ALLOWED
FOR THAT.
SO WHAT THE FCC DID VOTED LAST
DECEMBER 14th, TO VOTE FOR
RULES IN EFFECT TODAY, GO BACK
TO THE CLINTON-GORE POLICIES
WHICH WORKED SO WELL.
IT GETS CONFUSING TO FOLKS THAT
SOMEHOW CONSUMER STARTUPS ARE
NOT PROTECTED.
THEY ARE PROTECTED.
THE INTERNET WAS NOT BORN IN
2015.
IT WAS BORN LONG BEFORE.
NEIL: I UNDERSTAND THAT,
COMMISSIONER, OFFICIALLY HEARING
WHETHER THE AT&T, TIME WARNER
MERGER GOES THROUGH, IF IT DOES
GO THROUGH, WOULDN'T AT&T APT TO
BE PREFER TIME WARNER PROGRAMING
AND SPEED THAT TO ME THAN ANY
OTHER COMPETITIVE PROGRAM, AS
THINGS STAND NOW IN RIGHT TO DO
SO?
>> NOT IN ANTICOMPETITIVE WAY,
IN VIOLATION OF ANTITRUST LAW,
NUMBER ONE.
WOULD WOULDN'T HAVE ECONOMIC
INCENTIVE THIS IS
85 BILLION-DOLLAR MERGER.
CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, YOU'RE
IN THE CONTENT BUSINESS, YOUR
CONTENT IS MORE VALUABLE MORE
PEOPLE WATCH THE PROGRAM, NOT
FEWER PEOPLE.
YOU WILL NOT BUY
85 BILLION-DOLLAR COMPANY BY
HAVING FEWER PEOPLE WATCH YOUR
CONTENT BY RESTRICTING ACCESS.
NEIL: UNLESS YOU FAVOR YOUR OWN
CONTENT, RIGHT.
>> RIGHT.
THEN ALL OF SUDDEN YOU BECOME
LESS VALUABLE.
YOUR STOCK PRICE CRASHES AND
YOUR WHOLE BUSINESS CONCEPT IS
DESTROYED.
NEIL: YOU DON'T SEE IN OTHER
WORDS, THAT WAS PARAMOUNT FEAR,
COMMISSIONER, ALL OF SUDDEN THIS
WOULD GIVE FREE LICENSE TO THE
GUYS THAT CONTROL ALL THE PIPES
TO PREFER WHAT THEY WANT COMING
DOWN THE PIPES, NOT WHAT YOU
WANT?
>> REMEMBER WHEN TIME WARNER,
INC., TWIX, AND TIME WARNER
CABLE, TWC WERE ONE COMPANY THEY
DIDN'T DO THAT.
YOU KNOW THE END OF THE WORLD
WAS SUPPOSED TO COME WHEN AOL
AND TIME WARNER MERGED IN THE
LATE 90s AND EARLY 2,000s.
THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN EITHER WITH
ALL THE SAME ARGUMENTS Y IS
A, THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK, AND B
THE ECONOMIC INCENTIVES JUST
AREN'T THERE FOR THAT TO HAPPEN.
IT HASN'T HAPPENED WITH COMCAST
UNIVERSAL.
NEIL: AT&T-TIME WARNER SITUATION
DO YOU SEE LOOKS LIKE IT WOULD
GO THROUGH, MAYBE NOT?
COULD BE A -- ON MY PART, IF IT
DOESN'T IT CHANGES A LOT OF
DYNAMICS FOR A LOT OF DEALS THAT
COULD BE PENDING INCLUDING
COMCAST?
>> NO, FIRST OF ALL THE
GOVERNMENT HAD THE BURDEN OF
PROOF HERE IN THIS TRIAL.
THAT IS A VERY STEEP HILL TO
CLIMB.
THIS IS THE FIRST LAWLAWSUIT TO
OPPOSE A VERTICAL DEAL IN 47
YEARS, ALMOST HALF A CENTURY.
THERE IS A REASON FOR THAT.
THERE IS HARD TO PROVE THERE
WILL BE A CONSUMER HARM OR
CONSUMER WELFARE WILL BE HARMED
BY DOING THIS.
AND I THINK THE AT&T, OR THE
GOVERNMENT I SHOULD SAY, THE
GOVERNMENT WITNESSES WERE REALLY
KIND OF DESTROYED ON
CROSS-EXAMINATION IN TERMS OF,
WHAT IS THE YOU KNOW LYING
THEORY HERE FOR SAYING THAT THIS
CONTENT IS GOING TO BE MORE
VALUABLE IF FEWER PEOPLE WATCH
IT, THAT THERE IS ECONOMIC
INCENTIVE TO DO THAT?
WE'LL SEE.
ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN I GUESS HERE
IN WASHINGTON AND HAS BUT JUDGE
LEE ON, THE JUDGE IN CHARGE IS
VERY MUCH A LAW AND ORDER FACTS
AND LAW TYPE JUDGE, NO-NONSENSE.
I THINK HE WILL MAKE A