Lawmakers should not get caught up in the “micro-minutiae” of Internet...

of law and free market principles,” and “arbitrarily discriminates among market players and imposes an onerous set of price controls,” said the post by research fellow Seth Cooper: Any reforms should have the “ultimate purpose of abolishing compulsory licensing and rate controls, be it immediately or incrementally.” Cooper’s argument closely follows that of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, which released its own recommendations Monday for revising or replacing the Internet Radio Fairness Act (CD Nov 27 p1). The government not only substitutes “bureaucratic rate rulings” for market mechanisms but applies different standards to different services, letting cable and satellite pay lower performance rates than they otherwise could get and terrestrial radio pay nothing, he said. But even if bill supporters like Pandora get the same standard as cable and satellite -- Copyright Act Section 801(b) rather than the more expensive “willing buyer/willing seller” -- the bill won’t solve the “arbitrariness” of giving a pass to terrestrial radio or forcing music copyright holders “to the table” through compulsory licensing, Cooper said. The transition to a “free market for music” regardless of platform recognizes the “abundance” of the market and “technological alternatives available to consumers” through subscription, download purchases and radio, whose “rivalry” will set the “price points that meet consumer demand,” he said.