dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2011-05-03 09:01:30: According to the Salisbury Post, Time Warner Cable's bill in North Carolina aimed at making it harder for local community fiber deployments to operate is one step closer to law. ..

page: 1 · 2 · next


fuziwuzi
Not born yesterday
Premium
join:2005-07-01
Atlanta, GA

CSA forever!

Welcome to the Corporate States of America. We'll let you pretend there is a Constitution that protects individuals, as long as you know that's just a facade.

jkeelsnc

join:2008-08-22
Greensboro, NC

1 recommendation

HB 129

Yep, I have written my local NC senator and representative. The representative voted against it mainly because she is a democrat and because she is from one of the larger cities in NC (Greensboro). But people, just watch because this is exactly what you get with the republicons and esp tea party candidates in general. Fortunately, Gov Perdue will likely veto this bill. What is really interesting is that as important as this bill is, NONE of the local TV news stations or even the local rag have picked up information about this bill. WXII, WFMY, WGHP have all ignored it and the Greensboro News and Record hasn't had any stories about it lately either. Very interesting don't you think. Where is the money flowing from and to (from TWC into the media's hands in advertising dollars I'll bet? LOL)


88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

That's what voting GOP gets you

When the GOP less government intervention they mean less government intervention in BUSINESS not personal matters.

People that live in NC that care not to be backwards need to move out. Maybe when all these southern states lose the most educated( and therefore the higher earning ) citizens they'll learn.


Bill Neilson
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Arlington, VA

Sounds about right. Corporate interests

fund all levels of government and have language screwing many just so the corporations can make a few more $$$'s


Hazy Arc

join:2006-04-10
Greenwood, SC
Reviews:
·CenturyLink
·Embarq Now Centu..

1 recommendation

Did Anyone Here Actually Read The Bill?

Or are you simply taking Karl's weasel-word filled editorials as the bona-fide truth? I'm guessing the latter.

»www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2011/Bill···29v4.pdf

A quick reading of the bill shows that the limitations placed on city-owned broadband projects are not intended to stymie the projects, but level the playing field with private communications companies.


Xioden
Premium
join:2008-06-10
Monticello, NY
kudos:1

1 recommendation

You're right, it's not intended to stymie the projects... it's designed to prevent them altogether. All a private company needs to do to stop a municpal project is offer broadband to at least 50% of households. Not actually provide it, just offer it. This means all they have to do is make a package of at least 4Mb/s down, 1Mb/s up and they can prevent any and all municipal startups. Throw a an insane $150-200 a month price on it, and they can keep on providing their crappy 768k/128k internet for $50 a month without any worry of losing their monopoly/duopoly.


CableConvert
Premium
join:2003-12-05
Atlanta, GA

Sad for NC...Good for GA

The Atlanta Region has been worried for years about NC overtaking us as the leading area of the Southeast. I for one want to thank Marylin Avilla (R-Time Warner) for this bill. Now seriously...this is a horrible bill that flies in the face of everything the republican party stands for...less regulation, local control...this bill is bought and paid for by TWC. What gets me is that Avilla reps Wake Co., not exactly a backward rural community. If they dont send her packing next election they are ignorant of what their reps do or just too stupid. Plus that picture of her reminds me of that mean 4th grade teacher I had

jophan
Premium
join:2009-07-12
Jenkintown, PA

Just another pork barrel

I think they have a point. If taxpayer funds build the network, access prices will be terrible. Just think of all the pols (and their staff and kids and girlfriends) who need no-show jobs after being thrown out of office. That plus refusal to shut down non-payers if they're in sensitive demographics. Cynical? Me? I'm from PA; we've got toll bridges & roads & utilities just designed for that.

Oxygen69
Premium
join:2008-12-08
Madison, WI
reply to Xioden

Re: Did Anyone Here Actually Read The Bill?

The just sounds plain unconstitutional to me.. It could be considered a violation of Free Speech basically. If that passes they should fight it in federal court on that premise, and on other grounds of Monopolistic behavior. One might even go so far as to imply RICO laws.

netposer

join:2003-02-06
Nashville, NC
reply to jkeelsnc

Re: HB 129

So on one hand you are blaming "replicons" and the tea party but the local news outlets (democrat supporters) are not covering it. So the liberal media seems to be the ones that let you down.


axiomatic

join:2006-08-23
Tomball, TX

So basically...

So basically what we have here is that if Time Warner can't get what they want through sheer force of will they will pay their way in to a new law/bill?

Figures.... where the hell do consumers fit in to this fight? Oh right... they don't.

jkeelsnc

join:2008-08-22
Greensboro, NC
reply to CableConvert

Re: Sad for NC...Good for GA

Yeah, thats what I don't get either. The republicans love to talk about "small" government and giving local control to citizens and yet they consistently vote on bills and legislation that take that away from the citizens of this country. They are a dishonest, duplicitous bunch. They are not like nazis no but their methods are the same. Say one thing and mean another. Of course the democrats have their faults with this sometimes too.

jkeelsnc

join:2008-08-22
Greensboro, NC

1 edit
reply to netposer

Re: HB 129

They are no angels thats for sure. And a TV station thats already suffering from an expensive digital upgrade two years ago plus tight budgets on withering advertising revenue is not likely to air something that would anger TWC. They cannot afford to lose the advertising revenue. And yet this issue is more important than the advertising revenue.

Also, your statement is false. There are many conservatives in the media especially in the south. And for instance, WGHP which is the local Fox affiliate and OWNED by fox as a corporate station hasn't aired anything about this bill either.

Both parties are corrupt. Your statements are false. "liberal media" is just a canned phrase parroted from a radio program. Also if you look in most editorial columns in newspapers (at least around here) you will see comments from both conservative and liberal editors.

"liberal media" is nothing but an excuse to have a press that bends to reporting only the way a right wing fanatic decides it should be. But if the media reports both sides then they are "liberal". BS.

jkeelsnc

join:2008-08-22
Greensboro, NC
Another thought about local media is that they are dependent on TWC to carry their programming in the first place. It is in a TV station's interest to maintain the status quo if it keeps them on the air in a local market's cable system. And unfortunately, TWC rules the day on that. One of the problem is that they have an almost monopoly status at least on the internet. Dish and DirecTV are barely enough competition on the TV side.

jkeelsnc

join:2008-08-22
Greensboro, NC
reply to axiomatic

Re: So basically...

They don't fit in because TWC is looking out for itself not its customers. Furthermore, politicians in both parties are corrupt and bought by different kinds of corporations and special interests. Its sick and one reason I wish to change my voter registration from democrat to independent. Tired of this kind of nonsense really.

elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·EarthLink
reply to 88615298

Re: That's what voting GOP gets you

said by 88615298:

When the GOP less government intervention they mean less government intervention in BUSINESS not personal matters.

People that live in NC that care not to be backwards need to move out. Maybe when all these southern states lose the most educated( and therefore the higher earning ) citizens they'll learn.

Less government intervention in business DOES means less government intervention in personal matters. I don't want my city controlling my internet access, or taxing me to death to provide it to my lazy neighbors.

I'm glad the GOP is trying to preserve the profit motive, and save my hard-earned money, leaving the risk and liability to shareholders, not burdening the local treasury.

The underlying problem in most of these towns is the unwillingness of the households to pay the local market premium for the service they desire. You don't solve that by taxing your neighbors, you wait until technology provides a lower cost option (LTE, microtrenching), and a vendor sees enough margin to sell it, and/or the economy picks up enough that households find themselves willing to ante up; and no, the economy will not rebound with broadband access.

jkeelsnc

join:2008-08-22
Greensboro, NC

ATT and TWC

Well, I've had enough. And I know TWC doesnt' care so thats why I am cancelling my account. If they are going to push this ahead of customer interests and play hard ball then I'll take my money somewhere else. I already left ATT and will not spend my money with them anymore because of their ridiculous cap scheme recently. If we all cancel our services we can force them to do what we want which is back off and let the consumer... the CITIZEN decide whats right for local broadband. Corporations shouldn't be deciding this stuff for us in the first place.

netposer

join:2003-02-06
Nashville, NC

1 recommendation

reply to jkeelsnc

Re: HB 129

For one I don't listen to Hannity or Rush. And a FOX affiliate has nothing to do with Fox News on cable. A Fox affiliate is not a local version of Fox News but rather an affiliate of the Fox Broadcasting Company. Yes, both owned by the Fox Corporation. But let's not get into the consolidation of media companies.

Here in Raleigh the CBS affiliate (WRAL) is also the Fox affiliate (WRAZ).

Is that informative enough for you? And don't tell me to shut up on an internet forum that I've been a part of a lot longer than you.

gorehound

join:2009-06-19
Portland, ME
reply to jkeelsnc

Re: ATT and TWC

i would also cancel slime warner if there was competition.really frakken sucks i can't


jazzlady

join:2005-08-04
Tannersville, PA
reply to elray

Re: That's what voting GOP gets you

said by elray:

said by 88615298:

When the GOP less government intervention they mean less government intervention in BUSINESS not personal matters.

Less government intervention in business DOES means less government intervention in personal matters.

Oh seriously?

Right- I forgot- this only applies to men... :-(

jkeelsnc

join:2008-08-22
Greensboro, NC
reply to jkeelsnc

Re: ATT and TWC

Well, I did it. I cancelled these jerks just like I did ATT last fall. Fortunately, there were a couple of other options where I live. Not everyone has that option I know. I didn't want to cancel TWC but they won't relent from pursuing this foolish bill in the general assembly so bye bye. They are looking out for themselves not for their customers.

Tobester

join:2000-11-14
San Francisco, CA
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
reply to 88615298

Re: That's what voting GOP gets you

said by 88615298:

When the GOP less government intervention they mean less government intervention in BUSINESS not personal matters.

Couldn't agree with you more.

The fact that laws such as North Carolina's preventing local jurisdictions from installing local fiber, to better service the community, show business plutocracy at its best.

Unfortunately, business lobbyists work for money and the legislators who should represent the interests of "The People" can be bought with campaign donations.

I thank the "Roberts U.S. Supreme Court" decision for exacerbating the problem too.


KCrimson
Premium
join:2001-02-25
Brooklyn, NY
kudos:1
I think the courts should allow the community to waste their money as they please. If the current market hasn't seen a fiber startup until now, I'm sure it will either fail horribly (burdening the entire foolish community for generations), or they will change the playing field for such businesses retroactively. Either way, let the buyer beware (and watch the productive and sensible flee).

Tobester

join:2000-11-14
San Francisco, CA
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
said by KCrimson:

I think the courts should allow the community to waste their money as they please. If the current market hasn't seen a fiber startup until now, I'm sure it will either fail horribly............

We are in complete agreement.

For small rural areas without adequate internet services, who would like to install availability or capacity, it should be up to the community, not Corporate lobbyists.

We both know that Internet providers are "cherry-picking" the easiest installations.

By banding together smaller communities who might not ever see internet connections can advance, with the risks involved too.


peter190

@verizon.net

Broadband

Constitution? Since when is broadband access a constitutional right?

NC_Resident

join:2001-12-22
Goldsboro, NC
reply to jkeelsnc

Re: ATT and TWC

I am one of those that do not have good options. So sticking with TWC is what I have to do. We have been waiting for that DOCSIS 3.0 upgrade, likely will continue to wait until they (TWC) decides it is in their best interest to provide the upgrade in the Goldsboro area.

elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·EarthLink
reply to KCrimson

Re: That's what voting GOP gets you

said by KCrimson:

I think the courts should allow the community to waste their money as they please. If the current market hasn't seen a fiber startup until now, I'm sure it will either fail horribly (burdening the entire foolish community for generations), or they will change the playing field for such businesses retroactively. Either way, let the buyer beware (and watch the productive and sensible flee).

The locals in the community ARE free to waste their money, they just aren't allowed to waste the taxpayer's money.


CylonRed
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-06
Bloom County
reply to elray
quote:
Less government intervention in business DOES means less government intervention in personal matters.
The republicans were the group that wanted to control how you could have sex in your bedroom - and several are still trying to do that. Seems that is the exact opposite of less intervention in private matters to me.

And if republicans are also trying to limit internet provided by a community - seems even more so.
--
Brian

"It drops into your stomach like a Abrams's tank.... driven by Rosanne Barr..." A. Bourdain


KCrimson
Premium
join:2001-02-25
Brooklyn, NY
kudos:1
reply to Tobester
said by Tobester:

said by KCrimson:

I think the courts should allow the community to waste their money as they please. If the current market hasn't seen a fiber startup until now, I'm sure it will either fail horribly............

We are in complete agreement.

For small rural areas without adequate internet services, who would like to install availability or capacity, it should be up to the community, not Corporate lobbyists.

We both know that Internet providers are "cherry-picking" the easiest installations.

By banding together smaller communities who might not ever see internet connections can advance, with the risks involved too.

What you fail to see is that if there were a profit to be made, private corporations would have been competing to provide this service that the community seems to want so badly. Even if profits would take years, we've seen build-outs where initial capital expenditures are projected into many years (see Vz FiOS). Call it "cherry picking", or whatever, the fact remains that smaller communities that band together like this are stepping into an arena that the government was never intended in a market economy, and such experiments rarely if ever see their intended results without extreme cost or redistribution of resources or population.


KCrimson
Premium
join:2001-02-25
Brooklyn, NY
kudos:1
reply to elray
said by elray:

said by KCrimson:

I think the courts should allow the community to waste their money as they please. If the current market hasn't seen a fiber startup until now, I'm sure it will either fail horribly (burdening the entire foolish community for generations), or they will change the playing field for such businesses retroactively. Either way, let the buyer beware (and watch the productive and sensible flee).

The locals in the community ARE free to waste their money, they just aren't allowed to waste the taxpayer's money.

A referendum concerning such a capital expenditure by the locals would solve that differentiation. If (as I'm suspecting will occur) the locals approve such a project, there's little the opposition can do. It becomes a public works project like a toll road, a bridge or a dam. It wasn't long ago that there were private toll roads. I'm NOT endorsing this, but I'm not sure there's much that can stop an "inspired" populace from wasting the taxpayer's money.

IMO, the mistake the opposition has made to date is having the existing broadband provider taking on the legal challenge. It should have been coordinated with a local grassroots opposition group instead (similar to the NHL Coyotes bond issue opposition, where the league is foisting a bond issue on the public, and concerned opponents are preventing the issuance by devaluing the bonds).