1 edit | Re: Rules Schmules If "competition" is what our elected/appointed leaders truly want, they should be able to enact laws that allow any company/entity to offer any service they are willing to invest their own capital in. What could be "fairer"? |
|
|
|
 marigoldsGainfully employed, finallyPremium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1 | Should they be allowed to build whereever they want on public property to provide those services? |
|
 vpokoPremium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA | Is that the issue here? I didn't think adding IPTV would require any construction on private land. As someone above pointed out, any optics that have to be layed are going on existing poles and conduits, and Verizon is already laying fiber for broadband purposes. The issue is what kind of content Verizon is allowed to provide over their network. |
|
marigoldsGainfully employed, finallyPremium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1 | reply to Buttset
I was responding to Buttset's contention that we should allow any company to build infrastructure to offer any service they are willing to invest in.
Not to the specific situation of Verizon.
Verizon obviously wants to play by "telephone rules" because local governments have no leverage under those rules. Phone franchises are automatically extended and cannot be refused by a local government.
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://whip.isca.uiowa.edu
Member: American Association of Geographers, American Geophysical Union, American Water Resources Association |
|
