bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | reply to fiberguy
Re: More BS from BS
It's a silly law much like laws that prevent me from running coax along the fence and giving my neighbors access to free cable TV. |
|
emptywig
Huh? What?
Premium
join:2002-08-05
Pasadena, TX | No its not. That's stoopid. |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | Why not? If cable TV doesn't want to service them for a fair price and instead wants to gouge them why shouldn't I be allowed to step in and do some good community service? |
|
emptywig
Huh? What?
Premium
join:2002-08-05
Pasadena, TX
| Because you'd be stealing the cable co's product. I don't see how NO building its own network is comparable to stealing cable service. I'm pretty sure they're paying for the connections to the net. They're just not paying BellSouth, and BS is mad. Whah!
Your analogy is completely wrong. |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | I'm not stealing their product. I'd be paying the bill for it. I'm just sharing it with the community.
What authority does the city have to offer internet services? |
|
emptywig
Huh? What?
Premium
join:2002-08-05
Pasadena, TX
| What authority prevents them? What authority gives them the right to build roads? To pick up trash? To tax property and educate your children. Its called "the vote." Citizens vote and give the city the authority to do things on their behalf.
What gives BellSouth the authority to short-cicuit the will of the voting public? No one voted for them.
And you are providing the means for your neighbors to steal the cable co's content, you know it, you're doing it willfully. That's illegal.
As far as I know, the city isn't stealing anything. |
|
emptywig
Huh? What?
Premium
join:2002-08-05
Pasadena, TX | reply to bogey780
Since when does ANYONE need authority to offer interent services? What sort of question is that? |
|
CapinPete
Premium
join:2002-12-23
Loxahatchee, FL
| reply to bogey780
said by bogey780  :I'm not stealing their product. I'd be paying the bill for it. I'm just sharing it with the community. What authority does the city have to offer internet services? Are you serious? If you were a Bellsouth subscriber and tried to share your connection with everyone, I am pretty sure that would be against their terms of service.
You are comparing apples to oranges. If you wanted to lease your own dedicated line, like a T1 etc, then you could share it with anyone you wanted to.
Bellsouth wants to prevent muni's from being able to do things like this. I don't know how they get away with this garbage but basically it just ensures that they will have that much less competition. |
|
BuriedCaesar
It's Not Polite To Stare.
join:2004-03-27
Richardson, TX
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·AT&T Yahoo
| reply to bogey780
said by bogey780 : I'm just sharing it with the community. Okay - so you say you'd not be stealing the cable service, rather "sharing it with the community". Interesting notion.
I suspect that by doing that you'd be violating several of the terms of the contract you signed with the cable company when you agreed to accept installation of that service at your location and pay that bill, and in a variety of ways, too. That's where the fine print of that contract stomps through your front door and announces the illegality of what you've been doing...and they wouldn't care one whit as to how benevolent your intent was with your neighbors.
--
That was preposterous! Utter Nonsense! Totally unsupportable drivel! You can't be serious!....Um, what did you say? |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| reply to bogey780
Bogey, get real would you?
You buy a service which is defined by not only the cable company, but the FCC as well. There are laws about what you can do with the service. You are also bound by an agreement you have with the cable company to view the service in the dwelling at the address authorized by them at the time of the agreement was started.
Further, you don't have the permission from the networks to redistribute THEIR signals to anyone else for profit or not.
Like cable who signed a licence agreement to distribute the networks, you don't have the same right.
You're really reaching on this one. |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | reply to emptywig
Ok, point to me where a vote was taken? |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | reply to BuriedCaesar
And the city is violating the law. Not to mention doing somethign they're not authorized by the charter to do. |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | reply to fiberguy
Likewise. Where's the authorization for what the city is doing? |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| You mean the same city that has the authority to build roads, hire a police force, and provide other services? THAT city?
I didn't think that the city was becoming an ISP, rather, providing relief.
I think the question you should be asking is "where does BS get off gauging N.O. residents in a time of disaster?"
Bell South is in there charging people that are trying to literally pick up the sticks after the hurricans and floods $70.00 for internet, twice as much because they don't have phone? GET REAL! I guess you were ok with paying $6.00 a gallon for gas the on September 11th, 2001, too?
You stated you could run a cable down the fence and provide cable tv service to others. You don't have the right to do that. The city, who owns the network and the internet that's piped through it, is another case.
I could give a rats ass about BS and their temper tantrum.
Bogey, you are comparing apples and oranges. |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | Gov't can't do anything it wants because it feels like it. Where was the vote or amending of the city charter to allow this?
Go reread the story about who this is affecting. |
|
scaredpoet
join:2001-03-26
Monmouth Junction, NJ
2 edits | reply to bogey780
You're still comparing apples to oranges.
In your cable analogy, you're stealing cable because you are licensed to use the service for one household, and not share or resell it to other households. The cable company built the infrastructure and supplies the service, not you.
IF you built your own network, supplied your own infrastructure and backhaul, and signed all of the necessary deals with the networks providing content, then you could conceivably do what you like with it, including sharing the heck you wanted, and your cable company can't accuse you of promulgating theft of cable service. Assuming of course, the cable company doesn't decide that you're infringing on their monopoly and should not be allowed to compete with them, in which case they might lobby (if they haven't already) for exclusive franchise agreements.
New Orleans built their own wireless infrastructure, not BellSouth. They erected the hardware, negotiated the backhaul with an upstream provider, set up the infrastructure. They are a sharing a resource *they* created, not BellSouth. And yet, BellSouth feels that their near-monopoly control should not be challenged. it's not about theft of service; it's about BellSouth being able to control who makes their resources available in an area where the resources are scarce, and artifically keeping those resources as scarce as possible so that BellSouth can inflate the cost to consumers, and the resulting profit.
New orleans is not preventing BellSouth from offering their own service. If BellSouth wanted to set up their own WiFi access points and let people use them, I'm sure the city of New Orleans would do nothing to stop them.
What business is it of BellSouth's what the city does with the resources they've built of their own accord, and under what basis does this law they've lobbied for prevent theft?
Verizon Wireless offers EVDO service in New Orleans. Again, it's using infrastructure they built. And yet BellSouth isn't going after Verizon... yet. Why is that? What's the difference here? |
|
scaredpoet
join:2001-03-26
Monmouth Junction, NJ
1 edit | reply to bogey780
said by bogey780 :Gov't can't do anything it wants because it feels like it. No, but it can make a decision to provide essential services in a time of crisis. New Orleans is NOT "business as usual" yet, and won't be for some time.
Where was the vote or amending of the city charter to allow this? Where was the vote allowing the Red Cross, or FEMA to step in and offer assistance? No one I know who lives or lived in Louisiana remembers casting that vote, either. but it happened, didn't it?
(Well, it *barely* happened, but that's another debate...)
Go reread the story about who this is affecting.
The Red Herring article doesn't mention this hurting anyone, except maybe Bellsouth's ability to restrict basic communications access to a city where BellSouth has already failed to restore more than 66% of its basic phone service. I guess if BellSouth is incompetent, no one else is legally allowed to be competent, eh?
Lastly: what if New Orleans throttled the network to 128kbps as per the law's requirements? Would that still be "Stealing" under your flawed philosophy? |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here
| 'Where was the vote allowing the Red Cross, or FEMA to step in and offer assistance?'
Because there are laws allowing it. No vote needed.
Where y'at?
Because ya ain't here. That's for sure. All NPA/NXX in the city are up as far as I know. Most localities served by the muni-net are a lot farther along then 33%. A lot. Downtown, CBD, and French Quarter were relatively ok after Katrina. New Orleans Main never went down. The 66% you pitch must be a lot of New Orleans East and the 9th ward where service is almost 100% still out.
It's a simple question, can the people on the muni-net get service from a telecom company. The answer is yes. They can. They just don't want to pay for it. |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here
| reply to scaredpoet
'Verizon Wireless offers EVDO service in New Orleans. Again, it's using infrastructure they built. And yet BellSouth isn't going after Verizon... yet. Why is that? What's the difference here?'
Because Verizon is a business and New Orleans is the gov't. Something about unfair competition. |
|
