how-to block ads
|
|
view: topics flat text |
|
Comments on news posted 2007-06-28 14:50:30: Last fall, we interviewed Drew Clark of the Center For Public Integrity, an organization that's trying to map the real state of media ownership and broadband deployment via their Media Tracker database, much to the chagrin of incumbent providers. ..
|
 | | Never gonna happen That is for sure. | |
|  ARGONAUTgot ping?Premium
join:2006-01-24
New Albany, IN | "competitive harm" to us. It's all talk with nothing to say.  | |
| | | | Re: "competitive harm" to us. Actually it does do harm to the provider but who cares.
This information should be available to us anyway.
Not that I need it, but it would be nice to know. | |
|
 morboComplete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
2 edits | haven't read the article, but can't they request the info through the freedom of information act?
edit: ok they did. is it really the FCC's responsibility to say that it would cause competitive harm? that kind of talk is straight from the mouth of telco and cableco lobbyists.
so what does this stall tactic tell us about the FCC?
about the information they are trying to protect?
about why incumbents are scared? | |
| | Time4aNAPPremium
join:2007-04-09
Des Plaines, IL
1 edit | Re: haven't read the article, but said by morbo:can't they request the info through the freedom of information act? They can, but since the American people signed away their freedom in a cowardly reaction to 9-11, it's not going to accomplish anything.
so what does this stall tactic tell us about the FCC?
That the FCC, just like all Executive Branch agencies, is only as good as their chief.
about why [sic] incumbents are scared? I dunno...maybe Adelphia wasn't the only communications company with criminally corrupt management. They could be afraid of going to jail, and losing their fortunes and empires. | |
|
 MrMoodyFree range slavePremium
join:2002-09-03
Smithfield, NC | Competitive harm Competitive harm, as in our monopolies will be harmed by competition. | |
| | bmn? ? ?Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
1 edit | Re: Competitive harm Exactly. Forbid that cableco X find out that telco Y is serving an area they are not and decide to offer service there.
Oh no, the FCC needs to make sure that the telcos and cablecos can serve areas without competition and get guaranteed revenue.
As they say... "America... Best government (corporate) money can buy."
--
Prove it...
Save the Internet Time (NTP) service, use the pool. | |
| | | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | Re: Competitive harm said by bmn:Exactly. Forbid that cableco X find out that telco Y is serving an area they are not and decide to offer service there. Oh no, the FCC needs to make sure that the telcos and cablecos can serve areas without competition and get guaranteed revenue. Oh no, the FCC needs to make that potential competitors cant find out areas without any broadband to keep options opened for telcos and cablecos.
Dog in a manger. | |
|
| | Dog bless them guys from CPI. Apparently, our present government does not want the American people to have good and accurate information on the matters that affect them. No matter. It will be harder and it will take longer, but that information WILL come out, Kevin Martin and the people he works for be damned.
Oh, and to the incumbent apologistas here: That information on BB penetration is the property of the citizens of the US. our tax dollars paid for it and it does not affect any plausible national security interests. Only the financial well-being of incumbents who can't seem to keep themselves from lying.
I hope, before I pass on, we get to see a government that cares about the welfare of ALL the people, again, and not just the few and the monied. That's not too much to ask, is it? | |
| | | Just trying to save face IMO, the FCC is using the excuse of "competitive harm" because the data they actually have is probably laughable at best. | |
|  DrModemPremium
join:2006-10-19
USA
kudos:1
1 edit | ... sure it will cause "competitive harm" but isnt that what we need? | |
|  B_DuBNOT a city boy
join:2007-05-10
Cleveland, TX
 ·AT&T DSL Service
·Embarq Now Centu..
1 edit | Corperate profits -vis- an informed public. The way I see it.Most people just want a True and Accurate account of available service's in their area. While it's true that in a sense competition may hurt some profits, Large companies with big investors also have an advantage of
premium services i.e. more repair men, more staff for customer support.Smaller co's would offer a lower costing service, as in less support.This has always been common in dial-up as people understood that they didn't need all the EXTRAS from a Big ISP just to get on-line. 10$ vis 25$.As stated above big corps. don't want you to know who's where or who's not, because of competition, But without it you Loose Quality of Service period !. They can fix your problem or not.Companies that know they are the only source for a particular service really don't have to worry about it. The priority being more lines for more customers >thus > bigger profits. I want it released so I know ALL
the Companies and their Services that they offer in my area so it's not a big fiasco trying to find out or putting up with someone saying:
"We'll get on it right now". We all know how that goes! Competition is Democracy at its finest! I even went so far as to send them e-mail, and I will track down my congressional senators and reps associated with this and get them vigil about releasing this information.
Procrastination is a condition not an excuse.
The Law suit »www.publicintegrity.org/about/re···x?aid=64
The FCC -»www.fcc.gov/ | |
| ddparduePremium
join:2007-01-07
Hattiesburg, MS |  Yes, it would cause "competitive harm to the incumbents.
| |
|
| |
|
