1998年年會論文 -有線電視與電信事業跨業經營管制政策工具之研究—以美國經驗為例
篇名
有線電視與電信事業跨業經營管制政策工具之研究—以美國經驗為例
The Policy Tools of Cable/Telco Cross-Ownership Regulation: A Case Study of U.S.A
作者
張美滿
Chang, Mei-Man
中文摘要
本研究分析焦點為美國歷年來有線電視與電信事業跨業經營管制相關之政策工具,結果發現FCC與國會在1990年代以前所秉持的管制理念,符合「公共利益理論」的觀點,認為競爭是好的,獨占是邪惡的,相信人為設限的反獨占措施,較自由市場經濟運作來得有效,因此對於跨業經營禁令賦予反托拉斯管制;後來卻發現這種人為設置的市場進入障礙,無法達成既定之目標,雖然有效地禁止區域性電話公司跨業經營,阻隔此獨占電信服務市場之龐大勢力,入侵影視節目服務市場的危機,但是卻也讓有線電視產業急速成長,甚至獨占此地區性影視節目服務市場,言論及意見自由市場多樣性的目標反而無法達成,此外還引發違憲的問題,扭曲公共利益,導致管制目的不能達成。

1990年代以後,有線電視與電信事業跨業經營管制逐漸轉向,FCC希望能夠引進競爭,藉由市場上「潛在競爭者」此市場自由運作之方法,也就是去除過去人為的市場進入障礙,引進區域性電話公司加入影視節目服務市場,防範有線電視產業之獨占,國會最後在1996年電訊傳播法中,廢除過去長達26年之久的跨業經營禁令,開放有線電視與電信事業自由競爭。

所以綜觀美國整個管制歷史可知,在這段跨業經營管制歷程中,美國的管制政策已經大幅轉變,過去較傾向於「社會價值論」的觀點,相信「由政府介入,施以結構性的經濟管制,可以促成意見自由市場的多樣化」,轉變為「福利經濟論」的觀點,相信「市場自由競爭才是最適的管制政策,任何人為設置的市場進入障礙,反而有害意見自由市場的運作,無法促成傳播資訊服務多樣化之目標,公共利益也就因而難以達成」。

美國所採行的政策工具主要可歸納為「市場進入障礙」、「有效率的競爭標準」、「特許\經營執照要件」、「縮小禁令範圍」、「其他反獨占措施」及「產權買賣之禁止」這六類,其中最值得我國參考的就是:1996年電訊傳播法雖然廢除跨業經營禁令,但是仍然設有產權買賣之禁止條款,防範過度的併購及合資經營行為,而且政府管制之重點已經從過去之反獨占考量,轉變為防範不公平競爭政策。本研究認為,美國當前對於有線電視與電信事業跨業經營的管制政策,是朝向「福利經濟論」與「社會價值論」的折衷論點,因此政府所施行的管制措施及手段,至少必須要很適切地符合政府既定之管制目標,否則就可能會造成負面效果,對於憲法增修條文第一條所保障的言論自由造成侵害,並干預產業之正常運作,無法讓傳播通訊產業在符合經濟效益的環境下自由運作,消費者福利也就因而淪喪。
英文摘要
The purposes of this study are focused on the telecommunications regulation in the United States, which are aimed to analysis 1) the cable-telephone company cross-ownership policy tools; 2)the anti-trust concepts implied in these policy tools; 3) the effect of these policy tools.

Telephone company provision of cable television service has concerned the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for over two decades. In 1970, the FCC banned telephone companies and their affiliates from providing CATV service within their telephone service areas. Congress then in 1984, passed the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984. Section 613(b) of the 1984 Act, codified at 47 U.S.C. section 533 (b), made the FCC‘s ban statutory. Ending a lengthy legal battle, on February 8, 1996, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 eliminated the ban on cable-telephone cross-ownership.
Base on the industry enviornment analysis, the study found that the growth of the cable industry since 1970 mitigated the danger that the telephone compay could exclude independent cable television operators from the cable market. Like the telephone companies, cable operators enjoyed a virtual monopoly in their service areas prior to the 1996 Act. So, in 1990s, it is time for regulators to introduce telephone companies to participate in cable services market competition. Now the regulators in Taiwan also want to adopt the open-market-based approach to the cable/telco industries. Owing to the U.S.A. regulatory experience, we must take the cable and telcos industries enviornment into accout, make detailed assessment and then with fair and reasonable steps to let them get mergers.

According to the historical regulation in the United States, the study pointed out six kind of policy tools which are as follows: "market entry barriers", "the standard of effective competition", "the franchise requirement", "weaver", "other safeguards" and "prohibition on buy outs". Fearing of the cable/telco mergers would have no or little effect on actual competition, the last one is the best way for Taiwan policy-makers to learn. So industry convergence may have some benefits under anti-trust and anti-competition rules.
中文關鍵詞
有線電視政策,電信事業,跨業經營管制,有效率的競爭,開放式視訊系統,電訊傳播政策,電話撥接視訊管理規則
英文關鍵詞
cable-telephone,cross-ownership regulation,effective competition,open video system,telecommunications policy,video dialtone rules
發表日期
授權狀況
已授權