Am I the only on that thinks this is a bit of an overreach? Seems to me, good justifications for legislating would be
-If customers were being tricked into paying roaming charges in nefarious ways;
-If there were serious externalities somehow not being included in the roaming charge transaction
-If there were monopolistic / market manipulating behaviour going on.
-If the companies were subject to a tragedy-of-the-commons situation where private resolution was not feasible (they're not- the public broadcast spectrum is both rival and excludable in practice).
Instead, the state interest according to Kroes is that it's an "irritant." This kind of top-down control seems a bit counter to the hacker/startup ethos.
Edit: if you're going to down vote, please can you comment and have a dialogue?
-If customers were being tricked into paying roaming charges in nefarious ways;
-If there were serious externalities somehow not being included in the roaming charge transaction
-If there were monopolistic / market manipulating behaviour going on.
-If the companies were subject to a tragedy-of-the-commons situation where private resolution was not feasible (they're not- the public broadcast spectrum is both rival and excludable in practice).
Instead, the state interest according to Kroes is that it's an "irritant." This kind of top-down control seems a bit counter to the hacker/startup ethos.
Edit: if you're going to down vote, please can you comment and have a dialogue?