政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/35699
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 113311/144292 (79%)
造訪人次 : 50938691      線上人數 : 975
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧：
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號"，以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋，建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位，可獲得較完整資料
    •  進階搜尋


    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/35699


    題名: 無線廣播電視執照核發制度之研究--兼論商業執照競標之問題
    A Study of Broadcast and Television Licensing: Also Comment on Commercial Station Licenses Auction
    作者: 林孟芃
    Lin, Meng-peng
    貢獻者: 莊國榮
    江耀國
    陳炳宏
    林孟芃
    Lin, Meng-peng
    關鍵詞: 解除管制
    數位匯流
    無線廣電執照
    拍賣法
    公益義務
    deregulation
    digital convergence
    broadcast licensing
    auction
    public interest obligation
    日期: 2005
    上傳時間: 2009-09-18 15:46:58 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 主管機關於發照機制之選擇及其執照核發決定，不僅是滲透到無線廣電產業管制架構的每一處縫隙，也反映出社會價值之優先序位。
    從上個世紀以來，解除管制、數位科技與匯流現象高度衝擊了過去以執照為核心的無線廣電管制體系，也引發了一波管制革新之需求。形式上，無線廣電服務與電台執照是一系列權利義務與一套法律程序之化身，但從其功能面來看，執照之核發寓含至少有「註冊登記，分類管理」、「資源分配」、「限制市場參進與競爭」、「費用徵納」及「行為監管」等多元之目標功能。在英美，無線廣電執照之核發反映出該國無線廣電體系之社會角色定位，也反應出不同廣電體系下執照釋出及其頻率核配方式與結果之影響；管制革新也同樣令其重新認知了傳統執照制度中課予廣電業者公益義務之價格問題。
    拍賣法在廣電頻譜及經營特許之應用上，除有先例可循外，亦被認為將可以矯正過去傳統以命令與控制模式支配下之執照核發制度之缺失，並將因此增加頻譜使用效率、提升全體福祉。本文因此透過英美等國之制度規範與經驗之分析，來檢驗此一說法。期待藉由瞭解拍賣法及其相關特殊背景下運作之優劣得失，及晚近崛起之相關替選方案，能提供未來政策制訂者在商業廣電執照管理之改革議題上有更豐富的視野。
    儘管拍賣法在無線通訊領域應用上，現階段看來有相當誘人的成果，但本文認為，無線廣電事業有其特殊性，傳統頻率指配結合營業特許之執照體系，在使用拍賣法上，將可能產生近用、市場競爭、使用效率、內容多元等目標上無一討好之結果。再者，要達成自由市場或市場模式追求之效率目標，也並非單純使用拍賣法即可；相關配套措施之施行，同樣不可或缺。再者，我國無線廣電體制與英美更有不同，因此如何避免出現主管機關缺乏落實政策目標之能力，至關重要。
    目前我國無線商業廣電執照核發制度之問題，可說在頻譜與內容管制雙重目標間迷失；問題焦點並不在於拍賣或審議制的二選一習題上，而應是致力於明確化分配標準、公開透明的競爭程序。此外，在引入市場機制於執照制度、期能促進效率與效能之同時，如何平衡執照管理中的私益與公益問題，仍是數位匯流時代無線廣電執照管理議題之核心。
    The authority`s choice of a licensing mechanism and decisions thereof not only permeate nearly the entire regulatory fabric of our broadcast industries, but reflect our society`s priorities. Licensing, nominally, is a mutual promise by the legal procedure; moreover, it is also about the registration, limited competition, distribution of resourses, charges, and the code of conduct.
    Since last century, broadcast laws and regulations have been bombarded with deregulation, digitization, and convergence, and that is conglomerated to push the reform of broadcast licensing. Simultaneously, the communications revolution, like U.K. or U.S., has thrown into question the value of imposing public interest obligations on radio and television broadcasters.
    Broadcast licensing seems to be so daunting that some people anoint a few constituencies with very pressing appeals, give them special leverage, and throw everything else back on the market. The auction apologists would argue that the government should set clear and definite standards and tough performance requirements to ensure that good systems and service will result, whoever is the highest bidder. In a pure auction era, where dollars are equated with public worth and maximizing dollars will be the most important criterion, there will be strong pressure to also base allocation and allotment decisions on this standard.
    The merit of auctions in wireless communications licensing may be conspicuous, but the broadcast industry is unique and more complicated so that the change of a licensing mechanism, from the marketplace approach, could be made that a revised public interest standard and obligations failed to address the fundamental challenge--to reassess the power of the regulator when implementing the public interest obligations. Auctions of radio spectrum or broadcasting concession, in other words, will generate their own serious problems that should not be underestimated or denied.
    On broadcast licensing of Taiwan, auctions will not be the life buoy to predicaments of broadcast industries; on the contrary, a top priority is to enhance the clearness and definition, transparency, and fair competition, whether the authority prefers imitating an auction to innovating the traditional selection procedure, beauty contest, through a more competitive approach or not. Besides, we shall inspecting the key point of whether or not competition and the public interest are compatible in the ongoing dialectic still, continuing to struggle toward a balance between private initiative and public oversight.
    參考文獻: 中文文獻
    尤英夫（1999），傳播法之檢討，資料來源：http://taup.yam.org.tw/announce/9911/docs/28.html （最後瀏覽日期：Dec. 1, 2005）
    台灣數位視訊協會（2003），《台灣之數位廣播電視相關法規與政策探討》，未出版，台北：社團法人台灣數位視訊協會。
    石世豪（1996），市場競爭規範適用於廣播電視領域的理論基礎-德國法學界逾十載「卡特爾法」與「廣電法」論戰的啟示，《新聞學研究》，第五十三期，頁161-189。
    石世豪（1997），傳播革命衝擊下的廣播電視定義問題-功能性觀點下的概念解析，《台大法學論叢》，第二十六卷第三期，頁133-181。
    石世豪、莊春發、鍾起惠、陳炳宏（2000），《廣播電台聯播、聯營、策略聯盟、股權轉讓及併購等相關問題之研究》，行政院新聞局委託研究案。
    石世豪（2005），頻道撤照爭議的法律分析—從行政組織、程序及實體關係三面向解詬迷思，《台灣本土法學》，第七十四期，頁59-62。
    交通部電信總局（2002），《中華民國無線電頻率分配表》，台北：交通部電信總局。
    朱志宏（2000），《公共政策》，台北：三民。
    行政院新聞局（2000），《中華民國八十九年廣播電視白皮書》，台北：行政院新聞局。
    行政院新聞局（2003），《中華民國九十二年廣播電視白皮書》，台北：行政院新聞局。
    江耀國（2003），美國有線電視市場的特許整合與競爭管制，收錄在《有線電視市場與法律》，頁1-78。
    何吉森（2004），因應數位科技匯流之我國廣播電視政策－廣播電視法合併修正案評述，《科技法律透析》，頁52-62。
    李秀珠（2001），《電視數位化後頻道之使用及管理研究》，行政院新聞局委託研究案。
    李宜光（1992），《中美無線電傳播法制之比較》，東吳大學法律研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北。
    李建良（1999），論環境保護與人權保障之關係，《臺灣法學會學報》，第二十期，頁411-467。
    李建良（1997），基本權利理論體系之構成及其思考層次，《人文及社會科學集刊》，第九卷第一期，頁39-83。
    李福鐘（2003），《自由中國選編》，第六集 黨國體制批判，台北：稻鄉。
    邱家宜（2003），當商業電視遇到公共電視—從BBC與天空衛視的戰爭看數位時代的公共電視角色，第三部分（無線電視台經營權修法論戰）。資料來源：公視岩花館 http://www.pts.org.tw/~rnd/p2/2003/031105.htm（最後瀏覽日期：July. 10, 2005）
    周韻采（2003），頻譜核釋與制度：財產權與公信力的實證研究，《政治科學論叢》，第十九期，頁203-224。
    林靜宜（1996），《台灣有線電視產業之垂直整合（1992-1994）—政策法規之探討》，國立政治大學新聞研究所碩士學位論文，未出版，台北。
    洪貞玲（1996），《我國無線廣播電視執照核發與換發之研究》，國立政治大學廣播電視研究所碩士學位論文，未出版，台北。
    洪瓊娟、李大塊（1992），真實與謊言之爭—廣播頻率分配、使用之現況及未來走向，《行政院新聞局八十一年度研究報告彙編》，台北：行政院新聞局。
    唐震寰、虞孝成（2002），《規劃頻率釋出與業務執照分離發照制度之研究》，交通部電信總局委託研究案。
    張啟騰（2003），《廣電媒體所有權規範之研究》，世新大學傳播研究所碩士學位論文，未出版，台北。
    張琬琳（2001），開放電台南北三條聯播網串起政商版圖的重分配，《新新聞週刊第》，第七四一期，頁72-73。
    陳世敏（1991），國家與廣電頻率實用權之分析：論「有限頻道，無限使用」，《新聞學研究》，第四十五期，頁25-37。
    陳芸芸、劉慧雯（2003），Denis McQuail原著，《特新大眾傳播理論》，台北：韋伯文化國際。
    陳炳宏（2005），無線電頻譜管理體制與頻率指配模式研究，《新聞學研究》，第八十二期，頁171-210。
    陳美華（1995），《台灣地下電台之研究 成因與問題探討》，國立政治大學廣播電視研究所碩士學位論文，未出版，台北。
    陳嘉彰（2004），地下電台管理政策研析，《國策研究報告》，資料來源http://www.npf.org.tw/PUBLICATION/EC/093/EC-R-093-006.htm（最後瀏覽日期：Jan 12, 2005）
    彭心儀（2002），《美國資訊通信法案例評析》，初版，台北：元照。
    彭松村、唐震寰、鄭鈞文（1997），無線電頻譜管理策略之探討，《電工通訊》，六月號，頁11-16。
    彭芸、王國樑（1997），《影視媒體產業（值）調查分析》，台北：國立政治大學傳播學院研究暨發展中心。
    曾志超（2001），《建立有效率的頻譜分配制度：以財產權制度為基礎之分配》，國立中央大學產業經濟研究所碩士學位論文，未出版，桃園中壢市。
    曾瑋（2004），數位無線廣播電視政策之研究：公共利益的實踐過程，《經社法制論叢》，第三十四期，頁337-372。
    程宗明（2003），《批判台灣的電視政策，2000-2002—台灣無線電視台公共化與數位化之思辯》，國立政治大學新聞研究所博士學位論文，未出版，台北。
    須文蔚（1996），廣播電視結構管制行政程序法規之研究，資料來源取自：http://www.winway.idv.tw/（最後瀏覽日期：Nov. 1, 2004）
    馮建三（1995），《廣電資本運動的政治經濟學—析論1990年代臺灣廣電媒體的若干變遷》，台北：台灣社會研究社。
    馮建三（2000），國家主權與廣電管制：一個動態觀點，從歐洲聯盟「電視無疆界」十年史談起，《傳播文化》，第八期，頁317-338。
    馮建三（2005），政府若失靈廣電市場注定失靈，《台灣本土法學》，第七十四期，頁56-58。
    黃金益（2001），國內服務弱勢族群公益性電台的價值與生存問題之探討，《行政院新聞局九十一年度研究報告彙編》。台北：行政院新聞局。
    黃葳威、劉美琪（1998），《調頻中小功率廣播頻道繼續開放申設電台之可行性評估研究成果報告》，新聞局委託研究案，台北。
    溫俊瑜（2003），《從廣播執照核發談廣播電台之管理》，國立政治大學廣播電視研究所碩士學位論文，未出版，台北。
    熊杰（1995），《電子媒介基本法專題研究計劃報告》，行政院新聞局委託學術機構研究報告，台北：世新傳播學院傳播研究所。
    管中祥，重建廣播秩序的前提，《中國時報》論壇，2004.08.04
    劉孔中（2001），《電信管制革新與數位網路產業規範》，台北：太穎。
    劉柏立、彭心儀、劉孔中、鄭允勝（2005），《因應技術匯流發展，相關法規之修訂研究》，交通部電信總局委託研究案。
    鄭瑞城、翁秀琪、馮建三、王振寰等（1993），《解構廣電媒體—建立廣電新秩序》，台北：澄社。
    羅世宏（2003），廣電媒體再管制論，《台灣社會研究季刊》，第五十期，頁1-48。
    羅莊鵬（2004），《無線電頻譜的配用模式－政府管制、市場機制與共用模式之探討》，國立中正大學電訊傳播研究所碩士論文，未出版，嘉義。
    關尚仁（1993），從電台評鑑看民營廣播生態之探索性研究，《廣播與電視》，第一卷第二期，頁1-29。
    關尚仁（1997），台灣廣播事業的再生，《我國新聞傳播事業》，台北：中國新聞學會，頁63-86。
    英文文獻
    Albarran, Alan (1997). Management of Electronic Media. San Francisco: Wadsworth
    Publishing Company.
    Bagdikian, Ben S. (2000).The media monopoly. 6th ed., Boston, Mass.: Beacon Press.
    Barendt, Eric M. (1993). Broadcasting Law: a comparative study. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Bauer, Johannes M. (2002). "A Comparative Analysis of Spectrum Management Regimes", Paper presented at the 30th TPRC Conference, Alexandria, Virginia.
    Benjamin, Stuart M. (2002). The Logic of Scarcity: Idle Spectrum as a First Amendment Violation. Duke Law Journal, Vol.52, pp.1-111.
    Benkler, Yochai (2003). Some economics of wireless communications, in: Cranor, L. F. and Wildman, S. S. (eds.) Rethinking rights and regulations: institutional responses to new communication technologies (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), pp.149-192.
    Benzoni, Laurent, and Eva Kalman (1993). The economics of radio frequency allocation. Paris: OECD Publications.
    Birnbaum, Marc J. (2002). Low Power FM: The Federal Communications Commission’s Conflicting Roles of Policy the Spectrum and Ensuring Community Access to the Airwaves. Tulane Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property, Vol.4, pp.143-159.
    Bollier, David (2002). Silent Theft: The Private Plunder of Our Common Wealth. New York: Routledge.
    Brenner, Daniel L. (1990). Was Cable Television a Monopoly? Federal Communications Law Journal, Vol. 42, pp.365-411.
    Burns, John, Phillipa Marks, Florence LeBorgne, and Richard Rudd (2004). Study on Spectrum Management in the field of Broadcasting–Implications of Digital Switchover for Spectrum Management, prepared for the European Commission, 1514/ECB/FIN/3, June 2004.
    Calabrese, Michael. (2001). Battle over Airwaves: Principles for Spectrum Policy Reform, New America Foundation Working Paper (October 2001), Washington, D.C.: New America Foundation.
    Cave, Martin (2002). Review of Radio Spectrum Management: An independent review for Department of Trade and Industry and HM Treasury. Final report for Department of Trade and Industry and Her Majesty’s Treasury, March 2002.
    Chester, Jeff (2002). Strict Scrutiny: why journalist should be concerned about new federal and industry media deregulation proposals. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, Vol.7, No.2, pp.105-115.
    Glass, Martin C., and David M. Rhodes (1999). Catching the Wave: Should Canada Follow the Global Trend toward Spectrum Auctions? McGill Law Journal, Vol.44, pp.141-193.
    Coase, Ronald (1959). The Federal Communication Commission, Journal of Law & Economics, pp.1-42.
    Collins, Richard (1998). Back to the future--digital television and convergence in the United Kingdom. Telecommunications Policy, Vol.22, pp.83-396.
    Crane, Edward H., Doug Bandow, Daniel E. Troy, Brandt E. Gustavson, John Corry, and Adam D. Thierer (1995). Speaking Freely: The Public Interest in Unfettered Speech (Washington, D.C.: The Media Institute).
    Creech, Kenneth (2002). Electronic media law and regulation. 4th ed., Boston, Mass.: Focal Press.
    Curran, James, and Jean Seaton (2003). Power without responsibility: the press, broadcasting, and new media in Britain. 6th ed., New York: Routledge.
    Emery, Michael, Edwin Emery, and Nancy Roberts (1996). The Press and America: An Interpretive History of the Mass Media. 8th edition. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
    Emord, Jonathan W. (1991). Freedom, Technology, and the First Amendment San Francisco, Calif.: Pacific esearch Institute for Public Policy.
    European Commission. (2004). Study on conditions and options in introducing secondary trading of radio spectrum in the European Community. Final report for the European Commission (by Analysys, DotEcon Hogan & Hartson), May 2004.
    Faulhaber, G. R., and D. J. Farber (2003). Spectrum management: property rights, markets, and the commons, in: Cranor, L. F. and Wildman, S. S. (eds.) Rethinking rights and regulations: institutional responses to new communication technologies (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), pp.193-226.
    FCC (2003). “FCC Chairman Powell Launches "Localism in Broadcasting" Initiative: Agency Actions are Both Immediate and Comprehensive,” FCC Press Release, Aug. 20, 2003.
    Fleming, Hazel (1997). Media Ownership: In the Public Interest? The Broadcasting Act 1996. Modern Law Review, Vol. 60, Issue 3, pp.378-387.
    Fowler, Mark, and Daniel Brenner (1982). A Marketplace Approach to Broadcast Regulation, Texax Law Review, Vol. 60, pp.207-257.
    Free Press. (2004). Media Reform Action Guide: tools, tips and techniques for promoting change. Retrieved May. 20, 2005, from http://www.freepress.net.
    Geller, Henry, and Tim Watts (2002). The Five Percent Solution: A Spectrum Fee to Replace the “Public Interest Obligations” of Broadcaster. Retrieved Nov. 3, 2004, from http://www.newamerica.net/index.cfm?pg=article&DocID=844.
    Geller, Henry (1987). Broadcasting and the Public Trustee Notion: A Failed Promise, Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, Vol.10, No. I (winter), pp.87-91.
    Goldberg, Victor (1976). Regulation and Administered Contracts. Bell Journal of Economics, Vol.7, No.2, pp.426-448.
    Goodman, Ellen P. (1997). Digital Television and the Allure of Auctions: The Birth and Stillbirth of DTV Legislation. Federal Communications Law Journal, Vol.49, No.3, pp.517-552.
    Grünwald, Andreas (2001). Riding the U.S. Wave: Spectrum Auctions in the Digital Age. Telecommunications Policy, Vol.25, No.10/11, pp.716-728.
    Hallikainen, Harold (2000). Spectrum for Sale or Rent: Comment on US Spectrum Auction. International Journal of Communications Law and Policy. Retrieved Feb. 3, 2005, from http://www.ijclp.org/5_2000/pdf/ijclp_webdoc_6_5_2000.pdf.
    Ham, Christopher, and Michael Hill (1993). The policy Process in the Modern Capitalist State, Second Edition, Harvester-Wheatsheaf.
    Hazlett, Thomas W. (1990). The Rationality of U.S. Regulation of the Broadcast Spectrum The Journal of Law & Economics, Vol.33(1), pp.133-175.
    Hazlett, Thomas W. (1998). Assigning Property Right to Radio Spectrum Users: Why Did FCC License Auctions Take 67 years? The Journal of Law & Economics, Vol.41(2), pp.529-578.
    Hazlett, Thomas W., and Matthew L. Spitzer (2000). Digital Television and the Quid Pro Quo, Business and Politics, Vol.2, No.2, pp.115-159.
    Hazlett, Thomas W. (2001a). The Wireless Craze, the Unlimited Bandwidth Myth, the Spectrum Auction Faux Pas, and the Punchline to Ronald Coase’s Big Joke.: An Essay on Airwave Allocation Policy. Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, Vol.14, No.2, pp.337-570.
    Hazlett, Thomas W. (2001b). The U.S. Digital TV Transition: Time to Toss the Negroponte Switch 3 (AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, Working Paper 01-15, 2001).
    Hazlett, Thomas W. (2004). All Broadcast Regulation Politics Are Local: A Response to Christopher Yoo`s Model of Broadcast Regulation. Emory Law Journal, Vol.53, Issue 1, pp.233-254.
    Hoffmann-Riem, Wolfgang (1996). Regulating Media: The Licensing and Supervision of Broadcasting in Six Countries, New York, London: The Gulford Press.
    Horwitz, R. B. (1989). The Irony of Regulatory Reform: The Deregulation of American Telecommunications. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Hoynes, William (1994). Public television for sale: media, the market, and the public sphere. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press.
    Huber, Peter W. (1997). Law and Disorder in Cyberspace: Abolish the FCC and Let Common Law Rule the Telecosm. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Hula, R. C. (1988). Market-based Public Policy. Hampshire, England: Macmillan Press LTD.
    Hutchison, David (1999). Media Policy: An Introduction, Oxford: Blackwell.
    Kahn, Alfred E. (1990). Deregulation: Looking Backward and Looking Forward. Yale Journal on Regulation, Vol.7, No.2, pp.325-354.
    Kearney, Joseph D., and Thomas W. Merrill (1998). The Great Transformation of Regulated Industries Law. Columbia Law Review, Vol.98, pp.1323-1409.
    Kellogg, Michael K., John Thorne, and Peter W. Huber (1992). Federal Telecommunications Law. Boston: Little, Brown.
    Knowles, Eddie Ade, and Norma M. Riccucci. (2001). Drug testing in the Public Sector: An Interpretation Grounded in Rosenbloom’s Competing Perspectives Model. Public Administrative Review, Vol. 61, No. 4, pp.424-431.
    Krasnow, Erwin G., and Jack N. Goodman (1998). The “Public Interest” Standard: The Search for the Holy Grail. Federal Communications Law Journal, Vol.50, pp.605-635.
    Krattenmaker, Thomas G., and Lucas A. Powe (1994). Regulating Broadcast Programming. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
    Krattenmarker , Thomas G. (1998). Telecommunications Law and Policy. North Carolina: Carlina Academic Press.
    Kwerel, Evan, and Walt Strack (2001). Auction Spectrum Rights. Federal Communications Commission.
    Kwerel, E., and J. Williams (2002). A proposal for a rapid transition to market allocation of spectrum. OPP Working Paper Series 38, Federal Communications Commission.
    Lerner, D., and Harold D. Lasswell (eds.) (1951). The Policy Sciences: recent developments in scope and method. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    Lessig, Lawrence (1999). The Censorships of Television. Retrieved Nov.1, 2004, from http://www.lessig.org/content/articles/works/tv.pdf.
    Macus, B. K. (2004). The Spectrum Should Be Private Property: The Economics, History, and Future of Wireless Technology. Essays in Political Economics (Ludwig von Mises Institute). Retrieved Apr. 1, 2005, from http://www.mises.org/journals/essays/marcus.pdf
    McChesney, Robert W. (2004). The problem of the media : U.S. communication politics in the twenty-first century. New York: Monthly Review Press.
    McMillan, John (1995). Why Auction the Spectrum. Telecommunications Policy, pp.191-199.
    McMillan, John (1994). Selling Spectrum Rights. Journal of Economic perspectives, Vol.8, No.3, pp.145-162.
    McMillan, John, and R. Preston McAfee (1987). Auction and Bidding. Journal of Economic Literature, Vol.25, No.2, pp.699-738.
    McQuail, Denis, and Swen Windahl (1993). Communication Models: for the Study of Mass Communications. 2nd ed., New York: Longman.
    Melody, William H. (1980). Radio Spectrum Allocation: Role of the Market. American Economic Review, Vol. 70, Issue 2, pp.393-397.
    Mueller, Milton L. (1999). Digital Convergence and its Consequences, in Javnost--The Public, Vol.6, No.3, pp.11-27.
    Napoli, Philip M. (2002). Access and Fundamental Principles in Communication Policy. Law Review of Michigan State University Detroit College of Law, Issue 3, pp.797-818.
    Noam, Eli. (1998). Spectrum Auctions: Yesterday`s Heresy. Today`s Orthodoxy, Tomorrow`s Anachronism--Taking the Next Step to Open Spectrum Access. Journal of Law and Economics, Vol.41, No.2, pp.737-764.
    OECD (2003). The implications of convergence for regulation of electronic communications, 12-Jul-2004.
    Ofcom (2004). Ofcom’s Annual Plan: April 2004–March 2005.
    Oliva, S. M. (2003). The Future of the Airwaves: Feingold`s Anti-Property Bill? Retrieved Oct. 1, 2004, from http://capmag.com/article.asp?ID=2387.
    Owen, Bruce M., and Steven S. Wildman (1992). Video economics, Cambridge, London: Harvard University Press.
    Patterson, Nicholas J. (2002). The nature and scope of the FCC`s regulatory power in the wake of the NextWave and GWI PCS cases. University Chicago Law Review, Vol.69, pp.1373-1398.
    Posner, Richard A. (1998). Economic analysis of law. 5rd ed., New York: Aspen Law & Business.
    Prindle, Gregory M. (2003). No Competition: How Radio Consolidation Has Diminished Diversity and Sacrificed Localism. Fordham Intellecture Property Media and Entertinment Law Journal, Vol.14, pp.279-325.
    Powe, Lucas A., JR. (1987). American broadcasting and the First Amendment. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    Reed, David P. (2002). How Wireless Networks Scale: the Illusion of Spectrum Scarcity, presented at International Symposium on Advanced Radio Technology, Boulder, Colorado, March 4, 2002.
    Reed, Michelle (2002). Arising under Jurisdiction in the Federalism Renaissance. BYU Law Review, pp.717-743.
    Reed, William H., and Ronald A. Weiner (1997). FCC Reform: Governing requires a new Standard. Federal Communications Law Journal, Vol.49, pp.290-324.
    Robinson, Glen O. (1989). “Title I, The Federal Communications Act: An Essay on Origins and Regulatory Purpose,” in Max D. Paglin (ed.), A Legislative history of the Communications Act of 1934. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Rose, Carol M. (1998). Joseph Sax and the Idea of the Public Trust. Ecology Law Quarterly, Vol.25, pp.351-362.
    Rosenbloom, David H., and Deborah D. Goldman (1998). Public Administration: understanding managemnet, politics, and law in the public sector. 4th ed., NewYork: McGraw-Hill.
    Rosston, G. L., and J. L. Steinberg (1997). Using Market-Based Spectrum Policy to Promote the Public Interest. Federal Communications Law Journal, Vol.50, No.1, pp.87-116.
    Ryan, Patrick S. (2003). The court as a spectrum regulator: will there be a European analogue to U.S. cases NextWave and GWI? German Law Journal, Vol.4, No.2-1. Retrieved Sept. 10, 2005, from http://www.germanlawjournal.com/
    Ryan, Patrick S. (2004). Application of the Public-Trust Doctrine and Principles of Natural Resource Management to Electromagnetic Spectrum. Michigan Telecommunications and Technology Law Review, Vol.10, pp.285-372.
    Salamon, Lester M. (ed.) (2002). The Tools of Government: A Guide to the New Governance. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Shelanski, Howard A., and Peter W. Huber (1998). Administrative Creation of Property Rights to Radio Spectrum. Journal Law & Economics, Vol.41, Issue 2, pp. 581-607.
    Shepard, T. J. (2002). Comments filed to the FCC Spectrum Policy Task Force. ET Docket No.02-135, July 8, 2002.
    Sidak, Gregory, and Daniel F. Spulber (1997). Deregulatory Takings and the Regulatory Contract: the competitive transformation of network industries in the United States. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    Snider, J. H. (2002). Who Owns the Airwaves? Four Theories of Spectrum Property Rights. Retrieved Nov.1, 2004, from http://www.newamerica.net/Download_Docs/pdfs/Pub_File_808_1.pdf.
    Snider, J. H., and Harold Feld (2003). Reply Comments of the New America Foundation Comsumers Union Comsumer Ferderation of America Media Access Project Center for Digital Democacy Public Knowledge Benton Foundation, from http://www.newamerica.net/Download_Docs/pdfs/Pub_File_1231_1.pdf
    Snider, J. H. (2004). The Decline of Broadcasters’ Public Interest Obligations. Retrieved Nov. 1, 2004, from http://www.newamerica.net/Download_Docs/pdfs/Pub_File_1518_1.pdf
    Stigler, G. J. (1971). The Theory of Economics Regulation. Bell Journal of Economics, Vol.2, pp.3-21.
    Streeter, Thomas (1996). Selling the air: a critique of the policy of commercial broadcasting in the United States. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press.
    Shorenstein, Stuart A., and Lorna Veraldi (2003). Defining the Public Interest in Terms of Regulatory Necessity. Saint John`s Journal of Legal Commentary, Vol.17, pp.58-65.
    Stumpf, Ulrich, and Lorenz Nett (2003). The Economics of Frequency Trading (Conference Paper). wik-Consult, Bad Honnef, February 2003.
    Sunstein, Cass (1993).Democracy And The Problem of Free Speech. New York: The Free Press.
    Sunstein, Cass (2000).Television and the Public Interest. California Law Review, Vol.88, pp.499-564.
    Ting, Carol, Steven S. Wildman, and Johannes M. Bauer (2004). Welfare Comparison of Spectrum Property and Spectrum Commons Governance Regimes. August 31, 2004. WP-04-03. Retrieved Jan.14, 2005, from http://web.si.umich.edu/tprc/papers/2004/393/TPRC2004_TWB.pdf.
    Tunstall, Jeremy, and Michael Palmer (ed.) (1991). Media moguls, London; New York: Routledge.
    Van der Wurff, R., and Van Cuilenburg, J. (2001). Impact of Moderate and Ruinous Competition on Diversity: The Dutch Television Market. The Journal of Media Economics, Vol.14, No.4, pp.213-229.
    Werbach, Kevin (2002). Open Spectrum: The New Wireless Paradigm（Spectrum Series #6）, Washington D.C.: New America Foundation.
    Werbach, Kevin (2004). Supercommons: toward a unified theory of wireless communications. Texas Law Review, Vol.82, pp.863-972.
    White, Lawrence (2001). “Propertyzing’ the Electromagnetic Spectrum: Why It`s Important, and How to Begin,” in J.A. Eisenach and R.J. May (eds.), Communications Deregulation and FCC Reform: Finishing the Job (Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers).
    Whitt, Richard S. (2004). A Horizontal Leap Forward: Formulating a new communications public policy framework based on the network layer model. Federal Communications Law Journal, Vol.56, pp.587-672.
    Williamson, Oliver E. (1976). Franchise Bidding for Natural Monopolies: In General and with Respect to CAVT. Bell Journal of Economics, Vol.7, No.1, pp.73-104.
    Wollenberg, J. Roger (1989). “Title III, The FCC as Arbiter of `The Public Interest, Convenience and Necessity,” in Max D. Paglin (ed.), A Legislative history of the Communications Act of 1934. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Yoo, Christopher, S. (2003). The Rise and Demise of the Technology-Specific Approach to the First Amendment. Georgetown Law Journal, Vol. 91, pp.245-356.
    Zaragoza, Richard R., Richard J. Bodorff, and Jonathan W. Emord (1988). The Public Interest Concept Transformed: The Trusteeship Model Gives Way to a Marketplace Approach. In Jon Powell and Wally Gair (eds.), Public Interest and Business of Broadcasting: The Broadcast Industry Looks at Itself (New York: Quorum Books).
    Zelezny, John D. (2003). Communications law: liberties, restraints, and the modern media. 4th ed., Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Publishing.
    Zlotblow, David Seth (2004). Broadcasting License Auctions and the Demise of Public Interest Regulation. California Law Review, Vol.92, pp.885-925.
    描述: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    公共行政研究所
    91256005
    94
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0912560051
    資料類型: thesis
    顯示於類別:[公共行政學系] 學位論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 描述 大小格式瀏覽次數
    56005101.pdf466KbAdobe PDF21182檢視/開啟
    56005102.pdf396KbAdobe PDF2791檢視/開啟
    56005103.pdf472KbAdobe PDF21226檢視/開啟
    56005104.pdf922KbAdobe PDF21538檢視/開啟
    56005105.pdf738KbAdobe PDF21376檢視/開啟
    56005106.pdf862KbAdobe PDF21766檢視/開啟
    56005107.pdf553KbAdobe PDF21152檢視/開啟
    56005108.pdf415KbAdobe PDF2935檢視/開啟


    在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回饋