Author(s)
William J. Baumol, Martin Cave, Peter Cramton, Robert W. Hahn, Thomas Hazlett, Paul L. Joskow, Alfred E. Kahn, Robert E. Litan, John Mayo, Patrick A. Messerlin, Bruce M. Owen, Robert S. Pindyck, Vernon L. Smith, Scott Wallsten, Leonard Waverman and Lawrence J. White
Source
AEI Brookings Joint Center Related Publication 07-08, March 2007
Summary
This paper looks at proposals that would stop broadband carriers from charging more for a “fast lane” (“Net Neutrality”)
Policy Relevance
Many economists are concerned that net neutrality proposals would do more harm than good; enhancing competition would help.
Main Points
- Markets for broadband are workably competitive and prices have fallen substantially.
- Net neutrality legislation would stop carriers from controlling content and bar higher prices for faster service; this might do more harm than good.
- Broadband carriers should be allowed to experiment with different ways of pricing services, to encourage investment. Someone who only needs the best service to watch one movie should not be legally required to pay for more. It should not be illegal for users who need a fast lane all the time to buy it.
- Policymakers can help avoid carrier abuses by making more spectrum for wireless networks available and letting antitrust authorities police abuses.
