| reply to gao16
Re: Idiots Again, was the village going to rent their fiber network capacity to some carrier with the ability to load it with high bandwidth video products? If not, then they were planning on building a network with "black bandwidth" (to coin a phrase) not required for the common internet use of their citizens. I don't get it, and I don't see this fact discussed anywhere in this thread. |
|
| reply to AJ_CHICAGO
said by AJ_CHICAGO:Was the village going to rent the fiber in their private network to AT&T and Comcast? Maybe I missed that part. The villages have concerns. Some are ligit. They need to be worked out. Stating that franchise agreements are in order is taking a stand and not "working it out in good faith". Slapping on an upgrade moritorium for 6 months is also not what I would consider trying to "work things out in good faith". What the villages have done is to force the question of franchise agreement relevance to the courts. AT&T has no other viable option on that issue. It must be legally decided, now. ATT was trying to make sure no one else put in any other type of fiber network. They cry about not wanting to deal with franchise agreements HOWEVER, they want to be the only game in town. Sorry, but if the only way ATT can compete to to bully their way around, then they need to be regulated out.
ATT can't have it both ways. |
|
|
|
