how-to block ads
|
|
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
| reply to BF69
Re: Censored broadband But, if you think about it, M2Z wasn't giving away this access for free. Essentially, the government would have been paying for it by not charging the company for the spectrum. That essentially means the government was buying this access for the public. If you look at it that way, then we, the taxpayers, would have ultimately paid for it, with the federal government being the middleman. In such a scenario, the government has an obligation to allow all legal content to be accessible. They should have demanded completely open access, not censored access. | | |
|
 BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | said by ISurfTooMuch:But, if you think about it, M2Z wasn't giving away this access for free. Essentially, the government would have been paying for it by not charging the company for the spectrum. That essentially means the government was buying this access for the public. If you look at it that way, then we, the taxpayers, would have ultimately paid for it, with the federal government being the middleman. In such a scenario, the government has an obligation to allow all legal content to be accessible. They should have demanded completely open access, not censored access. It's not costing taxpayers anything. Do you realize how little the big broadcasters pay for thier spectrum to broadcast OTA TV? Practically nothing. Using your logic I guess you'd be all for killing off OTA TV so the government can sell it to Verizon and at&t so they can sell you $60 a month internet with 5 GB caps and $50 per GB overgages? This is your genius plan? | |
|
