<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for NetCompetition</title>
	<atom:link href="http://netcompetitionblog.org/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://netcompetitionblog.org</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 03:36:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on FCC Seeks Unbounded Spectrum Auction Authority by GlobServ</title>
		<link>http://netcompetitionblog.org/2012/01/17/fcc-seeks-unbounded-spectrum-auction-authority/#comment-1213</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[GlobServ]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 03:36:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://netcompetitionblog.org/?p=1572#comment-1213</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Blowout Auction ! You can save 90% of retail prices on many merchandise like iPad, iPhone, electronics and much more. Get Your Free Bids Here Today !]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Blowout Auction ! You can save 90% of retail prices on many merchandise like iPad, iPhone, electronics and much more. Get Your Free Bids Here Today !</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on NetCompetition Statement on Verizon/Cable-SpectrumCo Transaction by Test, Demo</title>
		<link>http://netcompetitionblog.org/2011/12/02/netcompetition-statement-on-verizoncable-spectrumco-transaction/#comment-1202</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Test, Demo]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 02:59:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://netcompetition.wordpress.com/?p=1526#comment-1202</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[$author you have amazing blog]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>$author you have amazing blog</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Grand Theft Auto-mated! Online Ad-Economics Fuel Piracy &amp; SOPA Opposition by 1099 form</title>
		<link>http://netcompetitionblog.org/2011/11/30/grand-theft-auto-mated-online-ad-economics-fuel-piracy-sopa-opposition/#comment-1193</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[1099 form]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2012 07:06:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://netcompetitionblog.org/?p=1520#comment-1193</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[whats your facebook profile?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>whats your facebook profile?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Grand Theft Auto-mated! Online Ad-Economics Fuel Piracy &amp; SOPA Opposition by Grand Theft Auto 3 Tenth Anniversary Edition for Mobile Devices</title>
		<link>http://netcompetitionblog.org/2011/11/30/grand-theft-auto-mated-online-ad-economics-fuel-piracy-sopa-opposition/#comment-1148</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Grand Theft Auto 3 Tenth Anniversary Edition for Mobile Devices]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 17:17:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://netcompetitionblog.org/?p=1520#comment-1148</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi, just wanted to tell you, I enjoyed this blog post. It was helpful. Keep on posting!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi, just wanted to tell you, I enjoyed this blog post. It was helpful. Keep on posting!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Top Ten Flaws in DOJ&#8217;s Case Against AT&amp;T &#8211; T-Mobile by Jim</title>
		<link>http://netcompetitionblog.org/2011/09/01/top-ten-flaws-in-dojs-case-against-att-t-mobile/#comment-1114</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jim]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Dec 2011 23:53:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://netcompetitionblog.org/?p=1367#comment-1114</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I agree with Jeff. Well said!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with Jeff. Well said!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Netflix&#8217; Negative Growth Story by Anon</title>
		<link>http://netcompetitionblog.org/2011/10/25/netflix-negative-growth-story/#comment-1079</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2011 19:50:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://netcompetitionblog.org/?p=1491#comment-1079</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Isn&#039;t the issue here with the media companies that netflix has contracts with? As far as my understanding goes, many of the contracts that Netflix had with the media companies were ending and for netflix to resign with them they forced netflix to increase their fee&#039;s and separate streaming and DVD to make media companies more money. That&#039;s why after increasing revenue with the fee hike netflix is still resulting in a loss of profits because they have more to pay the media companies.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Isn&#8217;t the issue here with the media companies that netflix has contracts with? As far as my understanding goes, many of the contracts that Netflix had with the media companies were ending and for netflix to resign with them they forced netflix to increase their fee&#8217;s and separate streaming and DVD to make media companies more money. That&#8217;s why after increasing revenue with the fee hike netflix is still resulting in a loss of profits because they have more to pay the media companies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on FCC Needs to Update Sect. 652 to Conform with Market Reality &amp; Congress&#8217; Intent by The American Consumer Institute - &#187; Outdated Merger Regulations Holding Back Competition</title>
		<link>http://netcompetitionblog.org/2011/08/22/fcc-needs-to-update-sect-652-to-conform-with-market-reality-congress-intent/#comment-1063</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[The American Consumer Institute - &#187; Outdated Merger Regulations Holding Back Competition]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Oct 2011 16:34:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://netcompetitionblog.org/?p=1127#comment-1063</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] proposal to lift restrictions under Section 652 which prevent Cable-CLEC mergers.  FCC officials would be smart to clarify Section 652&#8242;s intentions, which would remove any burden on CLECs and let telephony innovation [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] proposal to lift restrictions under Section 652 which prevent Cable-CLEC mergers.  FCC officials would be smart to clarify Section 652&#8242;s intentions, which would remove any burden on CLECs and let telephony innovation [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Top Ten Flaws in DOJ&#8217;s Case Against AT&amp;T &#8211; T-Mobile by Jeff</title>
		<link>http://netcompetitionblog.org/2011/09/01/top-ten-flaws-in-dojs-case-against-att-t-mobile/#comment-954</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jeff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Sep 2011 19:02:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://netcompetitionblog.org/?p=1367#comment-954</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m the only comment?  Wow... I&#039;m glad no one is reading this crap. What department of AT&amp;T PR do you work for?  National or Local? There may very well be NEW precedents being set forth in this lawsuit.  Have you thought about that?  If the mobile wireless market is so dynamic and fast changing then why would the merging of AT&amp;T &amp; T better the marketplace?  And when historically did the merging of two large companies ever &quot;Create&quot; more jobs?

And to say that the merging of these companies are going to bring more innovation quicker to more people is laughable.  AT&amp;T will not bring high-speed wireless or wired internet connections to rural and poor sections to the country whether there is a merger or not, they have in fact fought local governments from providing those services.  It is not in their best financial interests to &quot;Invest&quot; in poor and rural areas because there is no financial benefit... but then the block others from providing the service.  Can you explain legally why that is possible?

AT&amp;T should not be allowed to just do what ever they want.  This is more than a &quot;Competition in the marketplace&quot; issue to many people, it&#039;s about access to information and communication... and to say AT&amp;T is looking out for the interests of ALL Americans when they merge with T-Mobile to provide more and better service is a joke. They want to remove competition and increase the barriers to entry and provide the same BS service that they already do.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m the only comment?  Wow&#8230; I&#8217;m glad no one is reading this crap. What department of AT&amp;T PR do you work for?  National or Local? There may very well be NEW precedents being set forth in this lawsuit.  Have you thought about that?  If the mobile wireless market is so dynamic and fast changing then why would the merging of AT&amp;T &amp; T better the marketplace?  And when historically did the merging of two large companies ever &#8220;Create&#8221; more jobs?</p>
<p>And to say that the merging of these companies are going to bring more innovation quicker to more people is laughable.  AT&amp;T will not bring high-speed wireless or wired internet connections to rural and poor sections to the country whether there is a merger or not, they have in fact fought local governments from providing those services.  It is not in their best financial interests to &#8220;Invest&#8221; in poor and rural areas because there is no financial benefit&#8230; but then the block others from providing the service.  Can you explain legally why that is possible?</p>
<p>AT&amp;T should not be allowed to just do what ever they want.  This is more than a &#8220;Competition in the marketplace&#8221; issue to many people, it&#8217;s about access to information and communication&#8230; and to say AT&amp;T is looking out for the interests of ALL Americans when they merge with T-Mobile to provide more and better service is a joke. They want to remove competition and increase the barriers to entry and provide the same BS service that they already do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on FreePress McChesney&#8217;s Latest Collectivist Manifesto &#8212; Radical Fringe Series Part I by james john philon</title>
		<link>http://netcompetitionblog.org/2011/06/23/freepress-mcchesneys-latest-collectivist-manifesto-radical-fringe-series-part-i/#comment-858</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[james john philon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Jul 2011 21:09:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://netcompetitionblog.org/?p=1088#comment-858</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[the world is free to live in, but enjoying it is expensive.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>the world is free to live in, but enjoying it is expensive.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The FCC&#8217;s public wireless network blocks lawful Internet traffic by look it up</title>
		<link>http://netcompetitionblog.org/2011/06/13/the-fccs-public-wireless-network-blocks-lawful-internet-traffic/#comment-856</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[look it up]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Jul 2011 15:08:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://netcompetitionblog.org/?p=1077#comment-856</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Try a fact check and look up a definition. Stop spewing &quot;most people think&quot;, the problem is they don&#039;t.  The fact is that outbound and inbound only refer to the direction of the first data packet, not all data packets.  They are blocking traffic originating from external networks, not responses to requests from internal networks.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Try a fact check and look up a definition. Stop spewing &#8220;most people think&#8221;, the problem is they don&#8217;t.  The fact is that outbound and inbound only refer to the direction of the first data packet, not all data packets.  They are blocking traffic originating from external networks, not responses to requests from internal networks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

