 fcislerPremium
join:2004-06-14
Riverhead, NY | My yard....PLEASE! Put one on my front yard!!! C'mon! Who else is going to volunteer?
Afterwards...i'm going to dig a trench, bury some schedule 40 PVC, and then call AT&T to hookup my cross-connect. Mmmm...fiber goodness 
Oh wait....i can't run fiber....hope it's less than 100m from home to AT&T, otherwise i may be stuck on their VDSL  |
|
| So you would allow AT&T to put one of those big boxes in your yard, which would drop your property values, potentially make your driveway/street more dangerous from obstructing the view... all so you could get:
- no increase in broadband speed
- no decrease in cost to TV viewing
- just one more option to view 200+ useless channels
Where is the benefit? |
|
fcislerPremium
join:2004-06-14
Riverhead, NY | Oh...hold on...sorry
[/sarcasm off] |
|
bigjimc
join:2003-04-21
Middleboro, MA | reply to waynemr
SHOW ME THE MONEY!!!!!
Someone putting it on my yard is going to
#1 Pay Me
#2 Put it where I tell them
#3 Give me free unlimited service (Triple, Quad, Septuple pack) |
|
| said by bigjimc:SHOW ME THE MONEY!!!!! Someone putting it on my yard is going to #1 Pay Me #2 Put it where I tell them #3 Give me free unlimited service (Triple, Quad, Septuple pack) Hmmm.. let's see.... No, No, and ummm..... No. 
See, this is the whole point of the story. With Eminent domain, they get the town to TAKE your property for the "greater good" - you get no say in the matter. The town may pay you something for it, but don't expect anything dramatic.
Now, if the company came to you and said "We want to put a box in your yard, we want to pay you X per month to rent the space..." That would be great, but why would they when they can get the town to yank it from you and GIVE it to them?
Great, isn't it? Yes, it ISN'T. |
|
 gpidockPremium
join:2006-12-01
Columbus, OH | reply to waynemr
said by waynemr:- no increase in broadband speed - no decrease in cost to TV viewing - just one more option to view 200+ useless channels Where is the benefit? My words exactly! |
|
|
|
 marigoldsGainfully employed, finallyPremium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1 | reply to captokita
Under the Illinois bill, AT&T does not even have to go through the town. They are allowed to exercise limited eminent domain powers on their own. |
|
 en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | reply to fcisler
Splice into their power, and run your household AC off of it... they'll never know. |
|
Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA | reply to marigolds
Didn't the supreme court recently rule something about eminent domain not being used to take property from one private party to give to another? Or is this now considered a utility because it includes "phone lines".
Or was it that they ruled that as long as state law allows, it's okay? That sounds more like our supreme court... |
|
| The phone company is a "Utility" even tho they are exercising these rights for broadband services. |
|
 calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA | In many cases, your property is already subject to an easement for utility purposes. If they are on that, they will claim you have no ability to stop them.
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! |
|
 WaxPhotoI AM SAMPremium
join:2004-04-08
Roanoke, IN | reply to Ahrenl
said by Ahrenl:Didn't the supreme court recently rule something about eminent domain not being used to take property from one private party to give to another? Or is this now considered a utility because it includes "phone lines". Or was it that they ruled that as long as state law allows, it's okay? That sounds more like our supreme court... That would be the Kelo decision, but I doubt much if any of that ruling would apply here, as Utilities have long had special powers regarding use of private land. Easements and such, as mentioned before.
The question is whether a significant increase in speed (with VDSL) satisfies the standard for emminent domain. How much 'utility' and 'public good' is done by fattening your broadband pipe?
--
My Photography Blog | My Flickr Gallery - Socos | BBR Flickr Group |
|
bigjimc
join:2003-04-21
Middleboro, MA | reply to captokita
I Massachusetts, one woman stopped a highway for 27 years. I believe her name was Ingersall (as in ingersall rand) and has set precedence.
I go back to the damage that would occur if anything was on my property.
BTW...Part of any imminent domain taking requires reasonable payment to the person who is infringed upon. |
|
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA | reply to WaxPhoto
And besides, the Kelo decision didn't side with the landowners--it said that local government could condemn land just to give it to a different private owner they liked better. The backlash spurred some protective legislative efforts in some states, but not enough.
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! |
|
Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA | reply to WaxPhoto
Yes, but if there is already an easement near your property, I'd think you could demand they use the present ROW they have access to. Also the services that they are providing with this new equipment HAVE NOT been designated as utilities. |
|
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA | The problem often lies in the fact that they already have an easement across the front of many properties--easements granted with the expectation of being used for overhead wires or buried facilities only, but not with terms limiting them to such use.
And the problem is that while not all of the services being provided are utilities, the new facilities do support some utility services (i.e., POTS) so they (arguably) qualify.
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! |
|
