dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2013-09-10 09:24:41: Based on yesterday's oral arguments, things may not be going particularly well for the FCC in their battle versus Verizon over network neutrality rules. ..

page: 1 · 2 · next


fg8578

join:2009-04-26
Salem, OR

FCC brought this upon themselves

Back in the early 2000s, the FCC refused to consider cable modem service a telecom service, simply because the cablecos had never previously offered any telecom service. That was a bogus argument that now comes back to haunt the FCC.

Having classified cable modem as information service, the FCC could hardly continue to call DSL a "telecom" service even though it clearly was. But since DSL was functionally no different than cable modem service (i.e., in the eye of the consumer, both were simply broadband Internet access service), the FCC could not sustain differential treatment for the two services.

Had they not reclassified DSL to be similar to cable modem service, they likely would have been sued into submission by the telcos. So here we are.



elios

join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO

congress should just make a new law that makes ALL ISPs wireless as well common carriers and get rid of this 1 2 3 crap

simple one page
all ISPs are common carriers regardless of what that transport medium is



IowaCowboy
Want to go back to Iowa
Premium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
Reviews:
·Verizon Broadban..
·Comcast

States rights

I think regulation of broadband ISPs should be left to local state DPUs. As we've seen time and time again that the federal government is the most incompetent regulator.

My opinion is the company that owns the lines should be restricted to transmission, the ISP side of things should be left to third party companies like it was in the '90s so you would get a bill from two companies, one from your cable company (regulated rate base on rates filed with state DPU) for transmission) and one from the ISP of your choice.

The same model was used to break up the electric industry, by separating generation from transmission but I think it would be much more practical in the ISP business since data is routable, electric is not.
--
I've experienced ImOn (when they were McLeod USA), Mediacom, Comcast, and Time Warner and I currently have DirecTV. They are much better than broadcast TV.

I have not and will not cut the cord.



IowaCowboy
Want to go back to Iowa
Premium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
Reviews:
·Verizon Broadban..
·Comcast
reply to elios

Re: FCC brought this upon themselves

said by elios:

simple one page
all ISPs are common carriers regardless of what that transport medium is

No.

Simple one page
Broadband Internet Service Providers shall be considered a public utility and shall be subjected to the public utility consumer protections and answer to state departments of public utilities.
--
I've experienced ImOn (when they were McLeod USA), Mediacom, Comcast, and Time Warner and I currently have DirecTV. They are much better than broadcast TV.

I have not and will not cut the cord.

TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH
reply to fg8578

Very true! Remember Brand X?


TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH
reply to IowaCowboy

And we all know how well the PUCs work for consumers right?

ISPs should be an information service and just get rid of all the BS. Make them equal and get rid of all the courts with them. The FCC screwed up not the ISPs.


TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·MegaPath
reply to IowaCowboy

Re: States rights

And your model has yet to be proven to work for the electric and gas companies. The only thing those companies would have to do is set up another company to be the ISP- the same as power and gas companies do to be "deregulated" and under cut themselves while still making out a killing and laughing at everyone who thinks they're saving money.


Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
reply to IowaCowboy

said by IowaCowboy:

The same model was used to break up the electric industry, by separating generation from transmission but I think it would be much more practical in the ISP business since data is routable, electric is not.

That model has been an unmitigated disaster, here in New York, and in other locales. The locally owned utilities were compelled to sell all of their generating assets, which were all snapped up by out of state interests who proceeded to fire many of the local workers and then jack up the rates, while idling excess capacity to generate an artificial shortage that would justify further rate increases.

In theory we can now "choose" our electricity and gas providers, but the choice is meaningless. The price between providers is virtually the same, never more than a few percentage points off, which any economist worth his salt could have told you would have happened, since electricity and gas are commodities.

Transmission rates also went up, because the utilities lost access to the revenue they made from the exportation of excess generation capacity to other locales.

I'd love to go back to the regulated vertical monopoly of yesteryear for my electricity. So would all of the people who got laid off on both ends of the business (transmission and generation) during the shake up.


ieolus
Support The Clecs

join:2001-06-19
Duluth, GA
reply to IowaCowboy

That would be ideal. I wish it could happen, and soon.
--
"Speak for yourself "Chadmaster" - lesopp


Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
reply to TBBroadband

And that is perfectly fine. Let them setup an ISP and compete with other ISP's.

When this little internet thing started that is EXACTLY how it worked when you dialed in. You paid your phone bill which allowed you to use a modem to connect to the ISP of YOUR choice to connect to the internet.

That is exactly how it should be going now. We should have for all practical purposes 1 network that any ISP can get it's consumers from. Being that the only thing you truly need from an ISP is a public IP address it doesn't matter whom it comes from as long as it is routeable on the public internet.

The way it is now, many are lucky to have both cable and telco to pick as the connection. Some very lucky ones even have multiples of those to chose from. So let the states regulate them as the connection with regulated rate charges and then let us subscribe to whom we want for actual internet services whether that be their subsidiary ISP or some other company they are competing with.


TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·MegaPath

The thing is - they're not competing at that point. They still have the power to under cut- They have a full network provider behind them giving money.

Deregulation as the power/gas companies doesn't work, and wouldn't work for ISPs.

And you are free to select your ISPs. AT&T allows reselling/wholesaling of U-Verse, TWC, COX, BrightHouse, and all others allow reselling of cable.

It's the fact that everyone wants the gov't to but in and take control when it's not needed.


TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH
reply to Crookshanks

Same here. First Energy Corp owns countless suppliers plus their massive brands, and everything in between, prices are about the same and any that are less- are all the ones that FE STILL owns.


TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH
reply to ieolus

it's not ideal. its horrible.


OwlSaver
OwlSaver
Premium
join:2005-01-30
Berwyn, PA
reply to Crookshanks

Just because NY and CA got it wrong does not mean it is a bad idea. Other states have implemented the separation fairly well. As far as I can tell in PA, it is working. I am opposed to vertical integration - either in a monopoly or not. It cuts down choice and creates huge barriers to entry.



ieolus
Support The Clecs

join:2001-06-19
Duluth, GA
reply to TBBroadband

Only to people who think the status quo is just dandy.
--
"Speak for yourself "Chadmaster" - lesopp



linicx
Caveat Emptor
Premium
join:2002-12-03
United State
Reviews:
·TracFone Wireless
·CenturyLink

Every state is different

In my state phone, gas and lights are public utilities. Cable and Internet are not, and as such they are not regulated by my state PUC. .

Transmission fees are clearly spelled out on lights, gas, and cable bills. Often the transmission fee is greater than usage.

From my perspective my idea of net neutrality would be a fair rate for all, by region, particularly in areas where fiber is in the office and being used by telco to deliver phone and web services the last mile. I pay three times more than residents in cities 50-miles away for a fraction of the speed. I should not be paying $100/mo for 10/1 anywhere.
--
Mac: No windows, No Gates, Apple inside


Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY
reply to OwlSaver

Re: States rights

It works in PA? Is that why my per kWh rate in PA was virtually identical to New York?



tmh

@verizon.net
reply to elios

Re: FCC brought this upon themselves

Ever notice that Congress isn't doing anything much besides sitting on their thumbs these days?


Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
reply to Skippy25

Re: States rights

said by Skippy25:

You paid your phone bill which allowed you to use a modem to connect to the ISP of YOUR choice to connect to the internet.

Not exactly.

Your choices were limited to those ISPs who had a local access number, unless you intended to pay per minute long distance rates to be online.

Maybe that doesn't mean anything to an urbanite, but out in the sticks we were lucky to have one or two ISPs with a local number. Many locations had no local access number until the end of the 90s.

jjeffeory

join:2002-12-04
USA
reply to TBBroadband

Re: FCC brought this upon themselves

..but ISPs just move bits. They don't provide "information" or "knowledge", they just provide "data".


TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH

But the great FCC ruled them as an Information Service. They may not provide it directly but they move information. But according to the MSOs they only provide you access to their network.


tanzam75

join:2012-07-19

3 edits
reply to Crookshanks

Re: States rights

said by Crookshanks:

It works in PA? Is that why my per kWh rate in PA was virtually identical to New York?

Pennsylvania is part of the PJM Interconnection. You would expect Pennsylvania pricing to equalize to its neighbors -- assuming adequate transmission capacity.

Edit: New York is not part of the PJM. However, if any power generators are connected to both NY and PA, then they can bid to supply both New York and in Pennsylvania. This would tend to drive prices towards equality -- assuming adequate transmission capacity.

You would expect to see a major divergence in price only if the transmission lines are maxed out. In that case, the power would be "trapped" in the surplus region, which will see lower prices than the deficit region. This tends to happen only a few days each year. It is visible to industrial and institutional customers who pay spot pricing, but not to residential or small-business customers who pay a regulated tariff that averages out the differences.

The other part of your electric bill is the infrastructure charge. That would be the part that would differ, depending on the utility and on the regulators.

TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH
reply to Crookshanks

Not totally companies such as MCI/UUTNet and others created massive dial-in banks for ISPs to "rent" to those ISPs that wanted local numbers. How do you think AOL became national so quick. Also Juno/NetZero still use those databanks.


TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH
reply to OwlSaver

It actually has been proved not to work period. If it worked companies like Dominion and First Energy Corp. would not control the markets as they do.


TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH
reply to linicx

Re: Every state is different

No state has regulated CATV and Internet.


TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH
reply to tanzam75

Re: States rights

Actually PJM does NOT manage the auction of First Energy Corp in PA. they set their own pricing with the PUCs.


TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH
reply to tmh

Re: FCC brought this upon themselves

It's not the job of Congress to make sure your Internet works. They have other issues at hand that need to be taken care of- like making sure the gov't doesn't shut down on the 1st.


axus

join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to fg8578

And we have ex-chairman Powell to thank for that, if I remember correctly. His argument was that cable and phone companies would compete with each other. With telcos getting out of the fixed line business, that argument no longer flies, but the rules are already in place.


tanzam75

join:2012-07-19
reply to TBBroadband

Re: States rights

If the PUC is still involved in setting the price, then you can't exactly blame deregulation for Pennsylvania power prices ...


Rekrul

join:2007-04-21
Milford, CT

Don't worry...

The courts will throw out the net neutrality rules, ISPs will start giving preferential treatment to companies that pay. Internet service quality will take a nosedive and the FCC will do absolutely nothing.