So we already had the coming FCC battle over Verizon’s attempts to acquire the spectrum it needs, the Senate fight over ‘cybersecurity,’ and a possible Congressional fight over Internet sales taxation. But now there’s a new issue to keep track of: the FTC is taking it upon itself to regulate the Internet on the grounds of protecting privacy. Jim Harper seems thinks it’s nothing new, but under the Obama administration, I’m more concerned. Still Adam Thierer also says it could have been worse, though, but also mentions those dirty words ‘personal responsibility.’ Can’t have that.

Democrats are eager to empower the Obama administration, of course. That’s why we need a Republican Senate to go with a Republican House.

They’re not calling it Net Neutrality now that it’s all about restricting choice and empowering government to regulate the Internet, but the George Soros-funded Public Knowledge is called for Net Neut action against Comcast. On the Open Internet, your choices of Internet service are closed to what government decides you are allowed to have.

More FCC: the push continues for the FCC to continue to be a spectrum roadblock against Verizon, contrary to every goal of universal access it claims to have. That’s because universal access is supposed to be code for subsidies, not actual pro-growth, pro-investment policies that allow market signals to guide spectrum to the more efficient uses.

Naturally the White House opposes FCC reform which would return power back to legislators, not regulators. Can’t have that. Too much respect for the Constitution, which is over 100 years old.

I’ve actually been reading up on export controls lately, so when I see this seemingly-harmless plan to control export of censorship technology to unfree countries, I question whether it’s a good idea. We already have many cabinet-level departments doing export controls, plus a new directorate Obama created in 2010 which complicated the situation further. We might need simplification before we add more complication.

Apple and its publisher allies are probably about to get smacked hard as the agency pricing scandal comes out, where Amazon was pressured into taking the deal Apple wrote.

Support for the broad-based GOP alternative cybersecurity bill, SECURE IP, grows with NAM praising the proposal. SECURE IT’s light touch, and information sharing approach is much better than the massive power grab of the Lieberman-Collins bill.

So we already had the coming FCC battle over Verizon’s attempts to acquire the spectrum it needs, the Senate fight over ‘cybersecurity,’ and a possible Congressional fight over Internet sales taxation. But now there’s a new issue to keep track of: the FTC is taking it upon itself to regulate the Internet on the grounds of protecting privacy. Jim Harper seems thinks it’s nothing new, but under the Obama administration, I’m more concerned. Still Adam Thierer also says it could have been worse, though, but also mentions those dirty words ‘personal responsibility.’ Can’t have that.

Democrats are eager to empower the Obama administration, of course. That’s why we need a Republican Senate to go with a Republican House.

They’re not calling it Net Neutrality now that it’s all about restricting choice and empowering government to regulate the Internet, but the George Soros-funded Public Knowledge is called for Net Neut action against Comcast. On the Open Internet, your choices of Internet service are closed to what government decides you are allowed to have.

More FCC: the push continues for the FCC to continue to be a spectrum roadblock against Verizon, contrary to every goal of universal access it claims to have. That’s because universal access is supposed to be code for subsidies, not actual pro-growth, pro-investment policies that allow market signals to guide spectrum to the more efficient uses.

Naturally the White House opposes FCC reform which would return power back to legislators, not regulators. Can’t have that. Too much respect for the Constitution, which is over 100 years old.

I’ve actually been reading up on export controls lately, so when I see this seemingly-harmless plan to control export of censorship technology to unfree countries, I question whether it’s a good idea. We already have many cabinet-level departments doing export controls, plus a new directorate Obama created in 2010 which complicated the situation further. We might need simplification before we add more complication.

Apple and its publisher allies are probably about to get smacked hard as the agency pricing scandal comes out, where Amazon was pressured into taking the deal Apple wrote.

Support for the broad-based GOP alternative cybersecurity bill, SECURE IP, grows with NAM praising the proposal. SECURE IT’s light touch, and information sharing approach is much better than the massive power grab of the Lieberman-Collins bill.

Apologies, but I’m going to be a bit brief tonight. I have a lot going on this week, and starting Tech at Night at midnight my time just isn’t good. Sorry!

Chuck Grassley’s continuing the fight against the runaway FCC, leaving open the option of continuing after initial investigations. Good on him. Don’t foreclose options needlessly.

But even as Republicans attempt to keep government from being a problem, the administration is trying to keep pesky job creation from popping up. Merger review has become a monster. So have the ever-multiplying facets of spectrum review.

The more the administration does, the more we need Congressional oversight.

Irony watch: FTC to protect helpless Microsoft from evil antitrust violations.

Irony watch II: Sprint may admit its CEO is the source of its failure to compete, since they can’t blame AT&T anymore.

Speaking of AT&T, remember that customer who sued in small claims court over the unlimited data changes, and won? The Death Star appears concerned and is trying to make a deal.

Apologies, but I’m going to be a bit brief tonight. I have a lot going on this week, and starting Tech at Night at midnight my time just isn’t good. Sorry!

Chuck Grassley’s continuing the fight against the runaway FCC, leaving open the option of continuing after initial investigations. Good on him. Don’t foreclose options needlessly.

But even as Republicans attempt to keep government from being a problem, the administration is trying to keep pesky job creation from popping up. Merger review has become a monster. So have the ever-multiplying facets of spectrum review.

The more the administration does, the more we need Congressional oversight.

Irony watch: FTC to protect helpless Microsoft from evil antitrust violations.

Irony watch II: Sprint may admit its CEO is the source of its failure to compete, since they can’t blame AT&T anymore.

Speaking of AT&T, remember that customer who sued in small claims court over the unlimited data changes, and won? The Death Star appears concerned and is trying to make a deal.

November 20. That’s the day the Obama administration has chosen to regulate the Internet after what even The Hill calls “a partisan vote” at the FCC to pass the Net Neutrality regulations. I’m hoping Verizon and/or MetroPCS will sue and win a stay before that date, though I don’t know how likely that is for a court to act that strongly.

I’ve said much about the House and its strong opposition to Barack Obama’s regulatory overreach, but Senators are unhappy as well. Kay Bailey Hutchison is ready to fight. It looks like she will push to get the Senate to go forward with using the Congressional Review Act, as the House already did, to repeal Net Neutrality.

In AT&T/T-Mobile news, Sprint Nextel has stopped pretending its antitrust lawsuit is even about competition. Sprint wants the deal stopped, yes, but only because Sprint wants to merge with T-Mobile. And that’s not me saying that. See this quote of Sprint CEO Dan Hesse from the Wall Street Journal:

“I don’t believe that what the DOJ said in any way, not even a little bit, should be viewed as we want to keep four [major telecom carriers]” Hesse said at an investor conference today, according to Deal Journal colleague Shara Tibken. “My view is [the DOJ] would look at other consolidation very differently.”

Yup. The Justice Department’s own lawsuit AT&T is just the government choosing to prop up Sprint Nextel and protect them from lower prices. They’ll never admit it as Sprint does, though. This isn’t about protecting the public from oligopoly-created high prices at all. Good on AT&T for calling out Sprint as well.

Sprint truly is having trouble, too. Their big marketing campaign, hoping to swipe customers from Verizon and AT&T, has been promoting their unlimited, unthrottled data… but now they’re announcing plans to cap some data. Oops. They just can’t compete.

It’s been a bad week for Anonymous, heh. Just after they announce a “Day of Vengence [sic]” for Saturday the 24th, the FBI pounces and rolls up some of the members. Frogmarch! Frogmarch!

Free State Foundation says cable set top box regulations should die. I have to agree, because I know they are ineffective. Providers have already worked around CableCARD regulations by using new technologies to increase channel bandwidth, which happen not to work with CableCARD. So just give up already and try something new.

Quick hits: Moonbeam signed the Amazon tax bill, keeping California on its path to enforce an unconstitutional Internet sales tax.

Samsung is trying to get iPhones and iPads banned in Europe over patent issues, in retaliation for Apple’s legal successes against Samsung, as well as Apple announcing plans to drop Samsung as a supplier of even more iPhone and iPad parts. If patents get all gadgets banned, can we just repeal them? Thanks.

A note to regulators and legislators: People don’t actually care about privacy. We know this because they’re not actually doing anything about it. People talk about it because the teevee says to talk about it, but talk is cheap.

November 20. That’s the day the Obama administration has chosen to regulate the Internet after what even The Hill calls “a partisan vote” at the FCC to pass the Net Neutrality regulations. I’m hoping Verizon and/or MetroPCS will sue and win a stay before that date, though I don’t know how likely that is for a court to act that strongly.

I’ve said much about the House and its strong opposition to Barack Obama’s regulatory overreach, but Senators are unhappy as well. Kay Bailey Hutchison is ready to fight. It looks like she will push to get the Senate to go forward with using the Congressional Review Act, as the House already did, to repeal Net Neutrality.

In AT&T/T-Mobile news, Sprint Nextel has stopped pretending its antitrust lawsuit is even about competition. Sprint wants the deal stopped, yes, but only because Sprint wants to merge with T-Mobile. And that’s not me saying that. See this quote of Sprint CEO Dan Hesse from the Wall Street Journal:

“I don’t believe that what the DOJ said in any way, not even a little bit, should be viewed as we want to keep four [major telecom carriers]” Hesse said at an investor conference today, according to Deal Journal colleague Shara Tibken. “My view is [the DOJ] would look at other consolidation very differently.”

Yup. The Justice Department’s own lawsuit AT&T is just the government choosing to prop up Sprint Nextel and protect them from lower prices. They’ll never admit it as Sprint does, though. This isn’t about protecting the public from oligopoly-created high prices at all. Good on AT&T for calling out Sprint as well.

Sprint truly is having trouble, too. Their big marketing campaign, hoping to swipe customers from Verizon and AT&T, has been promoting their unlimited, unthrottled data… but now they’re announcing plans to cap some data. Oops. They just can’t compete.

It’s been a bad week for Anonymous, heh. Just after they announce a “Day of Vengence [sic]” for Saturday the 24th, the FBI pounces and rolls up some of the members. Frogmarch! Frogmarch!

Free State Foundation says cable set top box regulations should die. I have to agree, because I know they are ineffective. Providers have already worked around CableCARD regulations by using new technologies to increase channel bandwidth, which happen not to work with CableCARD. So just give up already and try something new.

Quick hits: Moonbeam signed the Amazon tax bill, keeping California on its path to enforce an unconstitutional Internet sales tax.

Samsung is trying to get iPhones and iPads banned in Europe over patent issues, in retaliation for Apple’s legal successes against Samsung, as well as Apple announcing plans to drop Samsung as a supplier of even more iPhone and iPad parts. If patents get all gadgets banned, can we just repeal them? Thanks.

A note to regulators and legislators: People don’t actually care about privacy. We know this because they’re not actually doing anything about it. People talk about it because the teevee says to talk about it, but talk is cheap.

I’ve basically got three topics for tonight’s edition. It’s sad that two of them are government antitrust actions. I suppose elections do have consequences, and one key consequence of Barack Obama’s election is corporatist selection of winners and losers in the marketplace.

The third main topic: Alleged corruption. I’m still playing the role of skeptic on accusations that the Obama administration is playing favorites in favor of LightSquared, the firm that has been caught in a regulatory quagmire over GPS issues it may have found a workaround for.

I want more 4G competition, but I also welcome Darrell Issa giving the LightSquared/Obama matter some oversight. I’d love to have a clear answer to this question. I can’t support fake competition brought about by corruption. I reject Obama propping up Sprint Nextel and if it turns out that Obama is propping up LightSquared then I reject that as well.

Which brings us to the next topic: AT&T and T-Mobile against the Department of Justice.

A trial date next year has been set for the Obama/Holder lawsuit against AT&T. Remember these facts though: Even Verizon admits the spectrum issue, even as the firm uses the lack of 4G competition to try for some rents. Plus we’re supposed to believe that T-Mobile would challenge the top providers when it’s not even getting the iPhone. Also, even Sprint Nextel and Cellular South admit there’s tons of competition.

Guess what? Patent lawyering is a drag on industry, and we just passed a pro-patent lawyering bill. Isn’t that swell?

The Search Neutrality chickens are coming home to roost at Google, but it doesn’t mean the pro-regulatory forces are right. Even Progressive hero Teddy Roosevelt didn’t think all big firms were bad.

I’ve basically got three topics for tonight’s edition. It’s sad that two of them are government antitrust actions. I suppose elections do have consequences, and one key consequence of Barack Obama’s election is corporatist selection of winners and losers in the marketplace.

The third main topic: Alleged corruption. I’m still playing the role of skeptic on accusations that the Obama administration is playing favorites in favor of LightSquared, the firm that has been caught in a regulatory quagmire over GPS issues it may have found a workaround for.

I want more 4G competition, but I also welcome Darrell Issa giving the LightSquared/Obama matter some oversight. I’d love to have a clear answer to this question. I can’t support fake competition brought about by corruption. I reject Obama propping up Sprint Nextel and if it turns out that Obama is propping up LightSquared then I reject that as well.

Which brings us to the next topic: AT&T and T-Mobile against the Department of Justice.

A trial date next year has been set for the Obama/Holder lawsuit against AT&T. Remember these facts though: Even Verizon admits the spectrum issue, even as the firm uses the lack of 4G competition to try for some rents. Plus we’re supposed to believe that T-Mobile would challenge the top providers when it’s not even getting the iPhone. Also, even Sprint Nextel and Cellular South admit there’s tons of competition.

Guess what? Patent lawyering is a drag on industry, and we just passed a pro-patent lawyering bill. Isn’t that swell?

The Search Neutrality chickens are coming home to roost at Google, but it doesn’t mean the pro-regulatory forces are right. Even Progressive hero Teddy Roosevelt didn’t think all big firms were bad.

Eric Schmidt, Google‘s executive chairman, is likely to mention Facebook, Apple and other competitors outside the search realm as he faces a grilling Wednesday during an antitrust Senate hearing on Capitol Hill, according to a report.

Politico, which got an advanced copy of Schmidt’s testimony, revealed that the former Google CEO is planning to emphasize the hyper-competitive nature of online media.

““We aim to provide relevant answers as quickly as possible, and our product innovation and engineering talent deliver results that we believe users like, in a world where the competition is only one click away,” reads Schmidt’s prepared statement. The Senate plans to stream the testimony at 2 p.m. ET.

The emphasis on competitors is an obvious retort for Google, which is being investigated by the Senate Judiciary Committee’s antitrust subcommittee on the grounds that Google may be using its heft in search marketing to freeze out rivals. If pressed, Schmidt (pictured) is likely to point out that Google competes not only with Microsoft and Yahoo on the search front, but with Apple, Facebook and Twitter. Facebook is now ranked number four in unique U.S. visitors with 162.4 million for August, behind Google’s 183.4 million, according to comScore. Apple, which competes with Google on the smartphone front, claimed 75 million visitors, while Twitter had 33.9 million.

Aside from the competition angle, Schmidt is likely to play up Google’s effect on the economy. The company claims to generate $64 billion in economic activity for small businesses.

Jonathan Rubin, an attorney with Rubin PLLC who specializes in antitrust cases, says that citing Facebook is irrelevant to the conversation.

“I don’t see Google’s search as a direct competition to Facebook,” Rubin says. “It’s sort of semi-competition.”

Nevertheless, Rubin believes the government’s case against Google is weak since the company doesn’t charge for its services, which takes competitive pricing off the table. Rubin says that lacking the pricing angle, the government would have to make the case that Google is sabotaging rival services like Bing. Successfully arguing that Google is favoring its own properties is even murkier ground, Rubin says, since Google’s search product hinges on providing the best results and being an “honest broker” (a.k.a. disinterested intermediary). That case, which the government will advance with testimony from the CEOs of Yelp and NexTag, is also not a clear-cut violation of antitrust laws, Rubin says.

Image courtesy of Flickr, Charles Haynes

More About: Antitrust, apple, Facebook, Google, Senate, yelp

For more Business coverage:

• Follow Mashable Business on Twitter
• Become a Fan on Facebook
• Subscribe to the Business channel
• Download our free apps for Android, Mac, iPhone and iPad

I’d like to start off tonight’s edition by saying that I enjoy some of the pushback I’ve been getting in this Tech at Night series. It’s fun when someone comes here, telling me I’m all wet, then ending up admitting they’re enamored of the whole Obama regulatory apparatus. It feels good to have my pro-liberty, pro-growth, small-government positions validated like that. So to the multifaceted George Soros astroturf machine I say this: keep it coming.

And of course, one of their key talking points is that wireless competition is in danger. Consider that Radio Shack says you have nine options, and Cellular South, a carrier you might never have heard of, is suing AT&T now, while budding 4G national competitor LightSquared answers accusations it’s buying favors from Obama. It’s hard to see how the DoJ lawsuit is anything but an attempt to prop up Sprint Nextel, and hard to disagree with T-Mobile thinking its deal with AT&T will proceed on the merits.

I can only wonder how many of The 182,000 jobs Facebook has created wouldn’t exist if we had intrusive government regulation of privacy.

So I hate to think of how many jobs are put at risk by the coming Net Neutrality regulations, making Greg Walden’s call for FCC reform and accountability all the more urgent.

When I saw Eric Schmidt’s silly calls for more spending, I first assumed the Google CEO was still auditioning for a position in the Obama administration. But now, I also wonder if he’s simply trying to butter up the White House to protect Google from its own antitrust troubles. Given this administration’s track record, I wouldn’t blame him for thinking that it’s needed.