FCC To Embrace Broadband Common Carriage? Agency faces tough road if they lose Comcast court case... After more than a decade spent deregulating and removing consumer protections from the phone and cable sector at the behest of industry, the Associated Press proclaims that the new FCC is looking to reverse course. According to the AP, should the FCC suffer a court loss to Comcast (which is challenging the FCC's authority over throttling and traffic management), the agency or Congress will need to act to restore some power to the FCC. That's an uphill climb after the agency ruled phone and cable "information services," and thereby free from most telecom regulation. Still, the agency insists they'll try: "If the court removes the legal basis for the current approach to broadband, the Commission may be compelled to undertake a major reassessment of its policy framework ... or Congress will have to act," said Colin Crowell, senior adviser to Genachowski. "Any policies the Commission pursues for the broadband marketplace will be rooted in the pro-consumer, pro-competitive structure of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, regardless of how the court ultimately decides." The problem of course is that major carriers like AT&T, Verizon and Comcast have so much influence over both political parties, that any reform granting the FCC additional authority is very likely to fail. As we've noted time and time again, it's nearly impossible to correct some of the problems in the broadband sector (or any other sector, for that matter) until something is done about undue corporate influence over policy. An effort to classify ISPs under " common carrier" is very unlikely to survive running the K Street gauntlet, but it's a battle that will at least prove interesting to watch.
|
 Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium join:2002-03-03 USA kudos:4 2 edits | Preventing corporate political contributions a lost cause
The courts have repeatedly shot down attempts by Congress to put limits on political spending by corporations. Any attempts to do that will be a l o n g time in coming.
»www.nytimes.com/2010/01/09/us/po···ate.html
A Supreme Court decision is due any day that could remove what small ineffective controls there already are on corporate spending: »www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co···politics | |
|  | | Wow.... My comment in the last news topic fits this news topic so perfectly.
I shall quote myself on it 
said by cpsycho:Well, for one thing when you look at the free markets and capitalism its not that capitalism is broken. Its the fact that the free markets and lobbying broke capitalism turning everything into monopolatism (yes I know it is not a word, but it needs to be invented for todays sake). Free market + Lobbying = monopolatism there is not doubt in my mind this is what has happened. Here is my reason as in this news story shows. Companies use collusion agreements to increase prices together. Government agency comes into look at it and investigate. Company lobbies government to stop, it does. This is not capitalism. » en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_mono···pitalismThis is indeed what North America looks like. | |
|  |  | | Re: Wow.... said by cpsycho:My comment in the last news topic fits this news topic so perfectly. I shall quote myself on it  said by cpsycho:Well, for one thing when you look at the free markets and capitalism its not that capitalism is broken. Its the fact that the free markets and lobbying broke capitalism turning everything into monopolatism (yes I know it is not a word, but it needs to be invented for todays sake). Free market + Lobbying = monopolatism there is not doubt in my mind this is what has happened. Here is my reason as in this news story shows. Companies use collusion agreements to increase prices together. Government agency comes into look at it and investigate. Company lobbies government to stop, it does. This is not capitalism. » en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_mono···pitalismThis is indeed what North America looks like. You are correct. The word you are looking for is fascism. | |
|  |  |  |
 MattAll noise, no signal.Premium join:2003-07-20 Jamestown, NC kudos:12 | Telecom Act of 1996 quote: "Any policies the Commission pursues for the broadband marketplace will be rooted in the pro-consumer, pro-competitive structure of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, regardless of how the court ultimately decides."
Good. Strip the last mile out of the hands of the duopoly and open it up to competitors. | |
|  |  Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: Telecom Act of 1996 said by Matt:Good. Strip the last mile out of the hands of the duopoly and open it up to competitors. that is absolutely, positively THE ONLY THING that will work, absent strong, clear and very punitive regulations. | |
|  |  |  Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
| Re: Telecom Act of 1996 and who is going to pay to run that network? Our tax dollars go to pay for enough, let alone a full blown out Telco/MSO network, that would need to be expanded and rebuilt in many areas.
We've already seen what happens when the Feds turn into a business, the USPS, Amtrak, takes over and invests in the banks, becomes GM, etc. PLUS paying off several wars on top of the debit we already had. -- www.two-pugs.com www.twopugsbrand.com | |
|  |  |  |  Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium join:2002-03-03 USA kudos:4 | Re: Telecom Act of 1996 said by hottboiinnc:and who is going to pay to run that network? Our tax dollars go to pay for enough, let alone a full blown out Telco/MSO network, that would need to be expanded and rebuilt in many areas. Those who pay little to no federal income tax are always in favor of having the gov't take things over. | |
|  |  |  |  |  MattAll noise, no signal.Premium join:2003-07-20 Jamestown, NC kudos:12 | Re: Telecom Act of 1996 said by Romney2012:said by hottboiinnc:and who is going to pay to run that network? Our tax dollars go to pay for enough, let alone a full blown out Telco/MSO network, that would need to be expanded and rebuilt in many areas. Those who pay little to no federal income tax are always in favor of having the gov't take things over. I'm not sure if this was a shot at me, but that would an extremely stupid assumption. Not only am I in a relatively high tax bracket, but I am self-employed so I pay an additional 15% of my AGI on top of what someone with an identical income, but who isn't self-employed, would pay.
And for the record, I do support a muni or government controlled last mile supported and maintained by taxes; either city, county, state, or federal levied. I think all new fiber should be dropped for it however.
My comments earlier weren't related to that, but rather the death-grip your telco and cable co have over the last mile. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium join:2002-03-03 USA kudos:4 | Re: Telecom Act of 1996
said by Matt:said by Romney2012:said by hottboiinnc:and who is going to pay to run that network? Our tax dollars go to pay for enough, let alone a full blown out Telco/MSO network, that would need to be expanded and rebuilt in many areas. Those who pay little to no federal income tax are always in favor of having the gov't take things over. I'm not sure if this was a shot at me, I know nothing about you and really don't care and wasn't replying to your post. Relax. -- My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
| |
|  |  |  |  |  |  Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
| if you want that last mile paid for by taxes, you're gonna pay mine too right?
After all i pay taxes to 2 different cities (due to where i work and live) and i refuse to pay for someone to have FTTH or anything else out in the damn middle of no where when it's not going to help me.
And as far as being self employed... I am too..but i also work for a major retailer. -- www.two-pugs.com www.twopugsbrand.com | |
|
 |  |  |  | | said by hottboiinnc:and who is going to pay to run that network? Our tax dollars go to pay for enough, let alone a full blown out Telco/MSO network, that would need to be expanded and rebuilt in many areas. We've already seen what happens when the Feds turn into a business, the USPS, Amtrak, takes over and invests in the banks, becomes GM, etc. PLUS paying off several wars on top of the debit we already had. We would necessarily pay for it through access fees in much the same way UTOPIA is run. | |
|  |  |  |  Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| said by hottboiinnc:and who is going to pay to run that network? ... not sure what the hell you're talking about. the last mile is in the ground and requires little or no upkeep.
instead of ATT or Verizon being the only ones that can use the last mile, anybody that wants to could offer service over the wires (or fiber).
That almost worked after the 1996 telecom act (remember how there used to be DSL companies other than the phone company?), but the regs were too weak and the fines too low. Verizon, then BellSouth, was fined $2B (yes, that's a B) for not allowing access to their last mile copper or otherwise refusing to work with CLECs. | |
|  |  |  |  |  jlivingoodPremium,VIP join:2007-10-28 Philadelphia, PA kudos:1 | Re: Telecom Act of 1996 said by nasadude:not sure what the hell you're talking about. the last mile is in the ground and requires little or no upkeep. That's really not the case, not even close. It takes regular and sustained investment to simply keep a network running the way it is today, much less to equip it to handle annual growth in traffic, regularly increasing speeds, etc. -- JL Comcast | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  MattAll noise, no signal.Premium join:2003-07-20 Jamestown, NC kudos:12 | Re: Telecom Act of 1996 said by jlivingood:said by nasadude:not sure what the hell you're talking about. the last mile is in the ground and requires little or no upkeep. That's really not the case, not even close. It takes regular and sustained investment to simply keep a network running the way it is today, much less to equip it to handle annual growth in traffic, regularly increasing speeds, etc. As often as I see both my local ILEC's trucks (GPON network) and Time Warner trucks running up and down my street which is all new wire, I can only imagine how much upkeep is required for the older sections of the plant. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
| Re: Telecom Act of 1996 which is the part that will have to be rebuilt if a new company took over. And that new company isn't going to foot the bill. So who would? It would take years for ROI on it. And that would leave one person, tax payers due to the same way the Bell system was built out. -- www.two-pugs.com www.twopugsbrand.com | |
|
 |  |  |  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK | said by hottboiinnc:and who is going to pay to run that network? The customers. | |
|  |  |  |  |  Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
| Re: Telecom Act of 1996 then that case prices would be tripled and beyond what they are now. But no, thats not the case here in the USA. We pay by taxes for everyone
The FCC should have enforced the TA '96 instead of letting the xLECs and everyone else do what they wanted. They caused this problem and now we'll pay for it out of taxes and higher bills. -- www.two-pugs.com www.twopugsbrand.com | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK | Re: Telecom Act of 1996 Um, the customers already pay for the last mile and everything else. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
| Re: Telecom Act of 1996 if the Feds take over, the customer will pay and so will the people NOT using it. The feds will fund it with tax money the same as they do with the USPS, and Amtrak. That's the problem. Why should my taxes go to something that i would never use? -- www.two-pugs.com www.twopugsbrand.com | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  MattAll noise, no signal.Premium join:2003-07-20 Jamestown, NC kudos:12 | Re: Telecom Act of 1996 said by hottboiinnc:if the Feds take over, the customer will pay and so will the people NOT using it. The feds will fund it with tax money the same as they do with the USPS, and Amtrak. That's the problem. Why should my taxes go to something that i would never use? Because that is how taxes work. Welcome to the real world, it's not always fair. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium join:2002-03-03 USA kudos:4 | Re: Telecom Act of 1996 said by Matt:said by hottboiinnc:if the Feds take over, the customer will pay and so will the people NOT using it. The feds will fund it with tax money the same as they do with the USPS, and Amtrak. That's the problem. Why should my taxes go to something that i would never use? Because that is how taxes work. Welcome to the real world, it's not always fair. It is funny that you don't apply that same philosophy to companies providing services that you aren't FORCED to pay for. So in your world government can be unfair, but not private enterprises. -- My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
| |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  MattAll noise, no signal.Premium join:2003-07-20 Jamestown, NC kudos:12 | Re: Telecom Act of 1996 said by Romney2012:said by Matt:said by hottboiinnc:if the Feds take over, the customer will pay and so will the people NOT using it. The feds will fund it with tax money the same as they do with the USPS, and Amtrak. That's the problem. Why should my taxes go to something that i would never use? Because that is how taxes work. Welcome to the real world, it's not always fair. It is funny that you don't apply that same philosophy to companies providing services that you aren't FORCED to pay for. So in your world government can be unfair, but not private enterprises. I don't even understand the connection you're trying to make, so feel free to elaborate. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service
| The Feds don't necessarily have to take over, it just needs to be divested into a regulated monopoly that exists only for that purpose. Customers pay. Same rates for same services. -- "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
| Re: Telecom Act of 1996 and again, someone has to foot that bill to maintain the network. either it will come from the USF, or it will come directly from every day taxes. With more and more people cutting out the ILEC the USF will dry up or they'll raise the USF on cell phones. And then apply it to HSI and CableTV. But then, if you switch to DirecTV you don't have to pay for the tax but DirecTV will want something as well, as everyone else who builds out their own network, again.
Just by taking the network out of the hands of the actual providers, someone other than the provider is going to pay. And you can bet more than the end user is going to pay. -- www.two-pugs.com www.twopugsbrand.com | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service
| Re: Telecom Act of 1996 It will come from the customers!
If you want service, you pay a set rate. The bill is foot by the people who use it. Quite simple and fair. -- "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
 |  |  |  |
 |  iansltx join:2007-02-19 Golden, CO kudos:2 | How are you going to do that to PtMP networks like cable or GPON? They aren't point-to-pont circuits to consumers, so aggregation would have to be on a higher level. Which would be a bit of a headache. | |
|
 koma3504AdvocatePremium join:2004-06-22 North Richland Hills, TX | Needs to happen LIke right now After more than a decade spent deregulating and removing consumer protections from the phone and cable sector at the behest of industry
Yep they get away with too much.
Including falsifieng Documents. To the F.C.C.
they need more power to protect the consumer.
Give it to them. -- Koma If YOu Don't Think It's Possable!! It's Acually A Reality!!The best way to predict the future is to invent it. Alan Kay!! Ya Don't Know The signal Till Ya Ride It!! Voice Break's There's Trouble!!!! | |
|  mworks join:2006-06-13 Faison, NC 1 edit | You pay for it like greenlight does. Project Greenlight is where a city, Wilson, NC wanted better access for its citizens. They went to the cable companies who said NO. So they installed one themselves, a total fiber network for everything with any customer having 100Mbps up and down access, paid for only by the revenue from the subscribers, no tax money. So what did cable do ? They sued the city. Can't get cable to do better but are not allowed to make it better ? Sounds like monopoly to me.
»savencbb.wordpress.com/about/ | |
|  WhatNowPremium join:2009-05-06 Charlotte, NC 1 edit | Who will pay for the transport system. The taxpayers are still on th hook if Greenlight fails. The other is the telecos are required to serve everyone at least for POTS but startups can pick and choose. The reason most people have power and telephone is because of the monopoly status. When you start dividing the pie it is no longer profitable to anyone.
The Wilson plan solved the problem in the city limits but made it worse for anyone outside the the town. I have a feeling if Matt and some other posters were on a 100 meg system they would care less about anybody that was not on that type of system or someone that can only get dialup. I am sure their maintenance is low now but in 10 years it will increase. I read Matt's review on North State and if the Telcos could charge what North State does in a well off small town next to High Point, NC. They would have a fios type system. It will not be long until all the telcos serve is the rural areas and the bill will be $100 for just pots. I live in a small town and the old part get their power from a city co-op and the part then was outside the city in the past from a big power company. The big power company is a lot cheaper. I grew up in a another town that the telco only served that town our phone bill for a 4 party line was more then our friends on the Bell System paid for a single party line. The service was terrible and did not improve until Alltel brought the system. | |
|
 | |
|
|