I need to respond to the typical respond of the Collectivist Statist over the issue of rights. There is one major flaw with John Egar logic. Water, Electricity, and other utilities are not rights; try to refuse to pay ones utility bill for a year to see what I mean. In addition, three are those who chose to live with out piped water, phones or electricity such as those who chose to live in remote areas or the Amish. Another fallacy is to compare broadband connection to waterways, railroads and interstate highways. Right of way a only applies the right for building transportation infrastructure and transit but it dose not give me the right for me to force other to build my own private railroad because I like trains.
There are two important concepts that often twisted or misunderstood concerning rights: first, rights by nature are not material and second, do not contradict the rights of other. We can agree we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness but we do not have the right to happiness and other expense. Another way to put it is a person has a right to free speech, but dose not have a right to force me to by that person a sound system and force me to listen. This will be a contradiction of my rights.
Also because of perceived benefit does not make broadband a right. As an evangelical Christian, I believe bible reading is very beneficial but it does not give me the right to force others to provide support for the printing and distribution of bibles. Broadband has less of a leg to stand on because much claims of broadband economic benefit are largely circumstantial and hearsay. Socialized (so called community broadband) is worst because of government tendency to be inefficient by consuming resource via taxes needed to run the network. Resource better let in private had who create economic wealth and jobs.
As right applied to broadband there only two: the right for private industry to build and operate broadband networks with out government interference or regulation.