Geneva Explains AT&T Roadblock Concerned with box placement, redlining The city of Geneva, Illinois has added an explanation to their website exploring why they're asking for a temporary AT&T "Project Lightspeed" build-out moratorium. The piece links back to many of our stories and your comments from earlier this week. The city explains they are not concerned with franchise fees, but are concerned with negotiating the placement of utility boxes and ensuring significant deployment. "AT&T has informed City Staff that they will make no commitment to serve our entire city with the same offering for all citizens. To agree to their current proposal would amount to the city actively permitting AT&T to redline our citizenry. In other words, they can pick and choose which customers hold the most value to them and serve only them. As is required in our existing franchises, we believe that our entire community should be treated equally. The city expects to be sued by the telco for challenging their belief that they do not need a franchise agreement to provide video services. See our previous reports from earlier this week.
|
 | | AT&T Takeover the U.S.A. already! | |
|  ronpinImagine Reality
join:2002-12-06
Nirvana
1 edit | Bias Having flirted with a "FTTH micro franchise" business plan -- I came face to face with these concepts. Being a "left-of-Center" kinda guy -- I surprised myself to find I actually side with the Telcos on these issues ( ! )
Business is business. If Geneva is serious about equality for all -- they need to pass a bond issue to subsidize the LightSpeed rollout to areas that SBC chooses not to serve. Otherwise the unprofitable areas will be effectively subsidized by you -- the other subscribers -- in the form of higher base costs.
What's next? -- should Starbucks be forced to go to the Ghettos in the name of fairness?
--
"Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country" - and stop the NeoCons | |
|  | modboy
join:2002-11-22
Petaluma, CA | Re: Bias Well, if Starbucks starts opening franchises in peoples homes, I think anyone who wants one should be able to get one.
I think it's great to see a municipality take a stand for it's citizens this way. | |
| |  Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | said by ronpin:Business is business. If Geneva is serious about equality for all -- they need to pass a bond issue to subsidize the LightSpeed rollout to areas that SBC chooses not to serve. Otherwise the unprofitable areas will be effectively subsidized by you -- the other subscribers -- in the form of higher base costs. What's next? -- should Starbucks be forced to go to the Ghettos in the name of fairness? I see no reason why a private business should be forced to provide services to everyone. They should be able to choose who they want to sell to.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
My Web Page | |
| | | | | Re: Bias You're an investor and our resident free-market preacher. You see no reason to do anything remotely beneficial to anything or anyone other than your own wallet. | |
| | | | ronpinImagine Reality
join:2002-12-06
Nirvana | Re: Bias To clarify: I'm saying that "equality" is the realm of government. Profit is the realm of business. Yes civil rights to apply to business -- and it works both ways.
--
"Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country" - and stop the NeoCons | |
| | | | | Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| Re: Bias Telcos are winning these battles. Telcos are getting their cake (all the laws they want, franchise changes limiting deployment requirements) and eating it too (passing laws hindering muni-broadband).
If you support their positions, you have nothing to complain about, because they're winning this debate on largely all fronts. We'll get to see in 5 years where this gets us. | |
| | | | | | ricep5Premium
join:2000-08-07
Jacksonville, FL | Re: Bias So in essence give them 5 years of near-monopoly power to fund a universal deployment and then when its done, break them up.
The only problem is that its not being deployed in a universal fashion. | |
| | | | | | | Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| Re: Bias quote:
So in essence give them 5 years of near-monopoly power to fund a universal deployment and then when its done, break them up.
There will be no universal deployment. In five years the dense, affluent portions of this country will have some VDSL and fiber service, and every-one else will get table scraps, while the FCC releases half-cooked data to suggest otherwise.
It's what supporters want, as they see government involvement in setting and enforcing deployment guidelines (or even having an effective national plan) as some kind of cancer. They see it as a cancer beause their primary concern is their own wallets, and helping others (and other communities) is not profitable.
Which is fine and their right, but I get bored when it's dressed up as a sophisticated ethos, because it's really just greed. Greed vs. humanism. (Not liberal vs. Conservative, or socialism vs. free market). | |
| | | | | | | | Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | Re: Bias said by Karl Bode:Which is fine and their right, but I get bored when it's dressed up as a sophisticated ethos, because it's really just greed. Greed vs. humanism. (Not liberal vs. Conservative, or socialism vs. free market). Well, in the words of Gordon Gecko, that well known movie character:
»www.americanrhetoric.com/MovieSp···eet.html
The point is, ladies and gentleman, that greed -- for lack of a better word -- is good.
Greed is right.
Greed works.
Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.
Greed, in all of its forms -- greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge -- has marked the upward surge of mankind.
And greed -- you mark my words -- will not only save Teldar Paper, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA. »www.americanrhetoric.com/mp3clip···reet.mp3
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
My Web Page | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Bias
Retire Rich Propoganda Poster |
--
The central injustice of capitalism is the exploitation and alienation of labor. | |
| | | | | | | | |  JigsawStardust We ArePremium
join:2000-10-21
Cleveland, OH | said by Romney2012:said by Karl Bode:Which is fine and their right, but I get bored when it's dressed up as a sophisticated ethos, because it's really just greed. Greed vs. humanism. (Not liberal vs. Conservative, or socialism vs. free market). Well, in the words of Gordon Gecko, that well known movie character: » www.americanrhetoric.com/MovieSp···eet.html The point is, ladies and gentleman, that greed -- for lack of a better word -- is good.
Greed is right.
Greed works.
Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.
Greed, in all of its forms -- greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge -- has marked the upward surge of mankind.
And greed -- you mark my words -- will not only save Teldar Paper, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA. » www.americanrhetoric.com/mp3clip···reet.mp3 I see our resident Shill always resort to ad hominem attacks when logic fails them.It works both ways Sparky!!!!!
--
»www.auralmoon.com/html/ Stimulating ears for 6 years | |
| | | | | | | | | | Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | Re: Bias said by Jigsaw:said by Romney2012:said by Karl Bode:Which is fine and their right, but I get bored when it's dressed up as a sophisticated ethos, because it's really just greed. Greed vs. humanism. (Not liberal vs. Conservative, or socialism vs. free market). Well, in the words of Gordon Gecko, that well known movie character: » www.americanrhetoric.com/MovieSp···eet.html The point is, ladies and gentleman, that greed -- for lack of a better word -- is good.
Greed is right.
Greed works.
Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.
Greed, in all of its forms -- greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge -- has marked the upward surge of mankind.
And greed -- you mark my words -- will not only save Teldar Paper, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA. » www.americanrhetoric.com/mp3clip···reet.mp3 I see our resident Shill always resort to ad hominem attacks when logic fails them.It works both ways Sparky!!!!! And maybe you can explain how a quote about greed from a movie character is an ad hominem attack.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
My Web Page | |
| | | | | | | | | | RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | Re: Bias He has to go look up 'ad hominem' first...
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
|
| | | | | | | |  sporkmedrop the crantini and move it, sisterPremium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
 ·Optimum Online
| said by Romney2012: The point is, ladies and gentleman, that greed -- for lack of a better word -- is good.
Greed is right.
Greed works.
Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.
Greed, in all of its forms -- greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge -- has marked the upward surge of mankind.
And greed -- you mark my words -- will not only save Teldar Paper, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA. You have a weird porn collection.
--
Day dreaming days in a daydream nation | |
|
| | | | | | | | said by ricep5:So in essence give them 5 years of near-monopoly power to fund a universal deployment and then when its done, break them up. The only problem is that its not being deployed in a universal fashion. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ask the people of PA. about Verizon and their tax breaks for universal deployment.  | |
|
| | | | | | Well, you are actually being very civil about it. But wouldn't you say, that since we are giving a business many of the benefits of a citizen/person, then that business also has to share the burdens of a citizen. Freedom doesn't come free.
For example, if you choose to live in our town, and own property in our town, then you agree to pay taxes to pay for the school system, WHETHER or not you have children going to the school. As a person, you are paying a TAX for something you don't use, in fact, it's the majority of your tax. On the other hand, you get to benefit from public water, police/fire, etc. Part of the cost of living in town is paying for services that the CITIZENS have determined are in everyone's best interest.
AT&T however, is a pack of lying whiners. They want full access to the 'fire/police, public water', etc, but they don't want to have to pay for the schools. Since the schools are 70% of the tax bill, if AT&T gets it's way, it is making a mockery of the system, by failing to play by the same rules we require everyone else to play by. It wants all the benefits and perks the citizens get, but doesn't want to pay the price, it just wants to be a welfare cheat. If AT&T wants to sell to the high profit areas of town, that's wonderful. But it has to provide the same service, at the same price to every resident of the town in exchange for the right to do so. It's called democracy, and it's what gives AT&T those rights it so flagrantly tries to abuse.
--
The central injustice of capitalism is the exploitation and alienation of labor. | |
| | | | | |  wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | Re: Bias said by G_Poobah:If AT&T wants to sell to the high profit areas of town, that's wonderful. But it has to provide the same service, at the same price to every resident of the town... I disagree. All businesses (except non-profits) are in the business of making money. If at&t or any other company wants to spend money to bring services to an area then they should be able to chose who can receive it. They should be under absolutely no obligation to provide service to areas that for one reason or another, they dont want to serve.
--
Now THATS superfluous!! | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Bias So, if a toxic waste dump company wanted to open a site in your town, you'd have no problem with that? I mean, it's a business, and it's job is to make money, so obviously you wouldn't have any problem with a waste dump in your back yard. Why, we ask, doesn't that occur very often? It's because to counter the business greed, we have towns that are in the business of looking out for their citizens. If the town decides that having a toxic waste dump isn't in their best interest, then a toxic waste dump probably won't be built in their town.
Hell, if you want to run a store in town, you live by laws that say how many parking spaces you need, how big a sign you can put up, and even what hours you can operate. You need a permit to even open a store, and you need to follow the rules of the town.
AT&T is no different than any other business. If it wants to run a business in a town, then the TOWN gets to set the rules. The town, in this case, is looking out for the best interest of the majority of it's citizens, as it should be. That's what a DEMOCRACY is. If AT&T can't make money selling it's product under the rules the town sets up, then AT&T can go elsewhere.
The real hypocrisy of AT&T is that when the town tried to run it's OWN network, AT&T ran a smear campaign saying fiber wasn't needed, to stop the town from running a service for ALL citizens. I for one applaud the leaders of the town, for standing up and holding AT&T to the fire.
--
The central injustice of capitalism is the exploitation and alienation of labor. | |
| | | | | | |  KoolMoeAw ManPremium
join:2001-02-14
Annapolis, MD | I agree with the essence of GP's post. It's fine if a company wants to pick the places it wants to serve, but it's also fine if the community doesn't believe that's 'right' and does not want the company in their town.
Why does the corporation get to override that? It should NOT! Any given community should certainly have the final say in what corporations, services, etc. are allowed in that town.
If a community wants to go Red Light, great. If they don't want any stripper bars, great. Why should any corporation be able to overrule community standards?
KM
--
War is a test of power, not a search for truth or justice. Can the violation of the primacy of love, destruction of life, and tearing of society truly be the will of God? | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Bias said by KoolMoe:I agree with the essence of GP's post. It's fine if a company wants to pick the places it wants to serve, but it's also fine if the community doesn't believe that's 'right' and does not want the company in their town. BINGO!!!
This is not about ATT wanting to serve only certain areas BUT for a community to serve areas that ATT won't serve anyway.
How can ATT lose money if they don't serve an area?  | |
| | | | | | | | Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA
1 edit | Although I also agree with GP's post, for once, I just wanted to mention that town's actually HAVE to allow "stripper bars" in their town. Or rather, they have to have an adult zoned area in every town, or anyone can setup that kind of business ANYWHERE in town. The supreme court has ruled that "stripper bars" are protected by the 1st ammendment. Our town has spent the last 5 years fighting a trash facility, the owners of which, have threatened to build the largest strip club in the state, if they're not allowed to build their trash plant. Yet our town already imports a large majortiy of the state's trash (over 16million people's worth) and it's already been deemed once (and soon to be twice) unhealthy by the state environmental board. The best part is when they decided to name their company "check-mate". That made lots of people happy... | |
| | | | | | | | | KoolMoeAw ManPremium
join:2001-02-14
Annapolis, MD | Re: Bias So a strip club can come into a community whether its wanted there or not? What if there are no Adult Zones areas? Theyn they can setup wherever?
If that's true, then it's just one more example of the problems with giving corporations the same rights as individuals - a true travesty and a primary source of the corruption in this country.
KM
--
War is a test of power, not a search for truth or justice. Can the violation of the primacy of love, destruction of life, and tearing of society truly be the will of God? | |
| | | | | | | | | |  pleekmoTriptoe Through The TulipsPremium
join:2001-09-14
Manchester, CT
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| Re: Bias said by KoolMoe:So a strip club can come into a community whether its wanted there or not? What if there are no Adult Zones areas? Theyn they can setup wherever? IANAL, however, as I recall, because businesses are protected as a means of "expression" then a community may not disallow a particular business to set up within it, no matter how distasteful that business may be.
However, a community may so regulate a particular type of business so thoroughly as to make a particular type of business unprofitable to do business within a town.
We are experiencing such a situation in my town where an adult-oriented business plans to move into a vacant store. The town cannot tell the business "NO!". However, the town can regulate the particular type of business in any manner the community deems proper short of telling the business that it cannot do business in this town. Towns are also, apparently, allowed to invoke short-term moratoria on particular types of business only for the purpose of generating regulations concerning business operation.
--
HCN: Because you deserve a rest!
Free Omelas! | |
|
| | | | | | | wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | said by KoolMoe:I agree with the essence of GP's post. It's fine if a company wants to pick the places it wants to serve, but it's also fine if the community doesn't believe that's 'right' and does not want the company in their town. Why does the corporation get to override that? It should NOT! that's just the point though, nobody said the community didn't want at&t there! in fact, as I posted, I would be willing to bet the community would be downright furious if they found out the local government had "made" this descision for them. Just because some local politician wants to fight the rollout based on a bad experience with the provider, does NOT mean the people fee that way. | |
| | | | | | | | | KoolMoeAw ManPremium
join:2001-02-14
Annapolis, MD | Re: Bias Elected leaders being the voice of the community pretty much gives them that power. Everything can't be a referendum, of course. If the community doesn't like it, they protest can eventually vote the folks they disagree with out of office.
Is this based on 'a bad experience with the provider' only?
KM
--
War is a test of power, not a search for truth or justice. Can the violation of the primacy of love, destruction of life, and tearing of society truly be the will of God? | |
|
| | | | | said by Karl Bode:You're an investor and our resident free-market preacher. You see no reason to do anything remotely beneficial to anything or anyone other than your own wallet. What for profit business hasn't done this? Its like suggesting Astin Martin subsidize $50K versions of their cars so the po-folks residents can better afford the same 'ride' as the richy-rich folks who will wind up paying more to cover that subsidy.
BTW, there has been this asinine notion going around that cable companies, when granted a franchise agreement in a county, has to provide some sort of basic service to ALL residents in that county. That is hogwash! Comcast has a franchise agreement in my county, and has never installed the first ounce of facilities in my neighborhood, or those 'hoods adjacent to mine.
Now, am I in one of those po-folks 'hoods? And before a county can offer citicism on a free-market company for not providing service to all, I can point out hundreds of counties in the good ole USA that deliberately take a back seat on much more basic needs of the society, like roads you can actually drive on. Resting on laurels only works when you have them. | |
|
| | JigsawStardust We ArePremium
join:2000-10-21
Cleveland, OH | said by Romney2012:said by ronpin:Business is business. If Geneva is serious about equality for all -- they need to pass a bond issue to subsidize the LightSpeed rollout to areas that SBC chooses not to serve. Otherwise the unprofitable areas will be effectively subsidized by you -- the other subscribers -- in the form of higher base costs. What's next? -- should Starbucks be forced to go to the Ghettos in the name of fairness? I see no reason why a private business should be forced to provide services to everyone. They should be able to choose who they want to sell to. Then they need to STFU When city's want to Run there own Service.Dude you can't have it both ways even thou you think you should(which is moronic) but that's a money grubber for yea.
--
»www.auralmoon.com/html/ Stimulating ears for 6 years | |
| | | | Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | Re: Bias said by Jigsaw:Dude you can't have it both ways even thou you think you should(which is moronic) but that's a money grubber for yea. And I see our resident Liberals always resort to ad hominem attacks when logic fails them.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
My Web Page | |
| | | | | | | Re: Bias "And I see our resident Liberals always resort to ad hominem attacks when logic fails them."
HEY! I resent that.
I'm our resident liberal commie. Don't go giving those other wanna be commies credit I deserve! They still have a lot farther to the left to go before they can come close to my Marxist ways. The fascist pigs shall feel our wrath when the proletariat rise up and crush them with their sickles and scythes, singing 'Le Internationale'. Religion and Capitalism are the opiates of the masses.
--
The central injustice of capitalism is the exploitation and alienation of labor. | |
| | | | | JigsawStardust We ArePremium
join:2000-10-21
Cleveland, OH | said by Romney2012:said by Jigsaw:Dude you can't have it both ways even thou you think you should(which is moronic) but that's a money grubber for yea. And I see our resident Liberals always resort to ad hominem attacks when logic fails them. IF it walks like a duck Talks like a duck it must be a duck.FYI Im more Conservative than you know.
--
»www.auralmoon.com/html/ Stimulating ears for 6 years | |
|
| | | | I see no reason why the City should be required to cede a Right of Way which belongs equally to all citizens in the city to a franchisee which has stated that it reserves the right redline certain areas in the City.
If AT&T really wants to do what they appear to want to do, let them lease or buy the land and the access they need from local homeowners; that would be in the true spirit of free enterprise. | |
|
| PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR
1 edit | said by ronpin:What's next? -- should Starbucks be forced to go to the Ghettos in the name of fairness? But we're not talking about ridicukously overpriced coffee. If AT&T wants to use the public right-of-way to supply a service that's increasingly becoming a necessity (e.g., high school teachers seem to more and more expect a student to have a broadband connection for homework), then they should commit to serving all the public.
Think how much worse, and how much more inescapable, the "ghettos" would be if they didn't have telephone, electricity, and television. I guess to alot of the spoiled suburbanites that post here that would be OK, but a government is charged with looking out for the welfare of all citizens. | |
| | | | | Re: Bias Or, if they really want to pick and choose, at least stop fighting cities and towns when they try to fill in the gaps created by their own deployment ideas.... | |
| | | RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | That's the problem in this case...they already have broadband connection options--two or three in fact. This battle is over what Comcast will do if AT&T is not held to the same obtuse, outdated franchise requirements for video programming. This is not a broadband 'black hole'.
This statement is outright bullshit: "The city explains they are not concerned with franchise fees". It is always about the money.
Apparently, Geneva is as bad a liar as AT&T and Comcast.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
| | | | | | Re: Bias Doc:
This is really not about getting additional funding out of AT&T. They lose nothing in adding a franchise fee to their billing, because they turn right around and pass it through directly to the end customer - just like Comcast does. It's not a hidden fee on the bill. It's pretty clearly called out.
The cities involved with this issue really have nothing new to gain moneywise that they aren't already getting now. One lost Comcast subscriber to AT&T equals the same fee to the city. We just want equal treatment and coverage for everyone in town.
If they're going to act as a cable/multi channel landline based video provider, they should be held to the same level that traditional cable providers are. That is universal coverage across the city. | |
| | | | | RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | Re: Bias Hi Peter.
I'm not saying that they (you) think they will lose revenue if a customer moves from Comcast to AT&T (which, anyone who has studied Lightspeed can tell you, is a stretch anyway).
I don't see any real problem with requiring AT&T to provide service to all of the incorporated area either. However, requiring them to provide the exact same service to every square inch ignores the limitations of the technology involved. And you don't require Comcast to provide residential-class HSI connections to businesses, nor do you require them to provide residential class cable TV to a bar. This isn't much different.
Having been "interacting" with Chicagoland suburban municipal government for over 20 years--and having read what your own has said about their fear of Comcast's legal department--you can't seriously state that it's not about money. If it wasn't, there would have been no mention of it last week before an official spin was concocted, and you would waive Comcast's franchise fees too.
I really like the socialist slant though: "universal coverage across the city". Is universally awful OK? How about universally absent?
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Bias Doc:
Our cable franchises don't require universal business coverage either, nor do we expect AT&T to cover all our businesses under a franchise model. We do expect them to serve every citizen equally though.
Obviously, the cities receive fees. But as far as a reason for a franchise, it really is about upholding the "Level Playing Field Statue" and universal citizen coverage. If the money doesn't change one way or the other, it's kind of difficult for it to be the reason for a stoppage. As much as it pains me to say (due largely to their past similar behavior during the referenda), we are legally bound to defend Comcast's franchise with the city.
And, if nothing else, that franchise provides for service to all of our residents. | |
|
| gatzdon
join:2002-10-25
Lake Zurich, IL Reviews:
·Covad Communicat..
·Covad Communicat..
| said by ronpin:If Geneva is serious about equality for all -- they need to pass a bond issue to subsidize the LightSpeed rollout to areas that SBC chooses not to serve. Otherwise the unprofitable areas will be effectively subsidized by you -- the other subscribers -- in the form of higher base costs. Umm, that's what the tri-city consortium tried to do a couple years ago and SBC spent over $200,000 to get it shot down. Why should they be allowed to exploit those same people a second time?
--
$100 placed at 7 percent interest compounded quarterlyfor 200 years will increase to more than $100,000,000 --by which time it will be worth nothing.- Lazarus Long | |
| | RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | Funny thing about that city web page cited above...
"We attempted to create it ourselves in the past through two broadband referenda proposals"
Now, I thought (and Ms. Collins insists) those were grassroots efforts of her group and not of the city of Geneva. Now we have the official Geneva website claiming that the city was the driving force behind the two failed referenda. Which is it?
I wonder who really wrote that page.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
| | |
See 7 replies to this post | |
| Reviews:
·Bright House
| said by ronpin:Having flirted with a "FTTH micro franchise" business plan -- I came face to face with these concepts. Being a "left-of-Center" kinda guy -- I surprised myself to find I actually side with the Telcos on these issues ( ! ) Business is business. If Geneva is serious about equality for all -- they need to pass a bond issue to subsidize the LightSpeed rollout to areas that SBC chooses not to serve. Otherwise the unprofitable areas will be effectively subsidized by you -- the other subscribers -- in the form of higher base costs. What's next? -- should Starbucks be forced to go to the Ghettos in the name of fairness? No, but Starbucks is a very poor example. At least with Starbucks, you can simply buy one of their coffee makers and a big-ol bag of their coffee beans to enjoy the same quality. With project lightspeed, you can't. | |
|
 dslwanterIt's comingPremium
join:2002-12-16
Niles, OH | Well then! If they don't want to see project lightspeed, I'll sure as hell take it! | |
| ricep5Premium
join:2000-08-07
Jacksonville, FL | Terminology Issue The Illinois Level Playing Field Act refers to "cable" providers.
ATT Lightspeed classifies themself as a "data service"
City of Geneva quotes the act correctly, but then replaces "cable" with "video" when making their arguments against ATT.
Its these kind of terminology issues when legislation is written that results in conflicts like this. I won't go off on why non-education of our legislators on tech issues causes these problems.
I agree with Geneva (and Wheaton & Roselle) on their right to protect their ROW's and know what is being installed (Wheaton has significant precedence in this with power utilities & cell towers) but I also think Geneva is stuck trying to stand on a legal ladder that has some somewhat weak steps.
In any event, ATT is trying to push a camel through a legal needle hole that was created at the federal level when "data services" were defined.
Unfortunately, I am afraid this will end up in a court to resolve. The Illinois Legislature is too easily bought off to get this resolved through updated legislation. It would get hung up in committee as each paid interest competed with each other. It is too small an issue to deal with in Congress and does not have enough political weight (yet) for the FCC to weigh in.
I see a long drawn out battle before this comes to resolution. | |
| |  birdfeedrPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-11
Warwick, RI
kudos:5
1 edit | Re: Terminology Issue said by ricep5:The Illinois Level Playing Field Act refers to "cable" providers. ATT Lightspeed classifies themself as a "data service" City of Geneva quotes the act correctly, but then replaces "cable" with "video" when making their arguments against ATT. Its these kind of terminology issues when legislation is written that results in conflicts like this. Actually, the ILPF Act refers to it all as "community antenna television system" then goes on to define it. Any reasonable person could distinguish applicability of the law to Lightspeed. If the network is used to deliver data, then ILPFA would not apply. As soon as Lightspeed delivers video ILPFA does apply.
Past efforts to defeat a local municipal network cast a bad light on AT&T's proposal today. It cannot be denied by any but the most brazen liars with no conscience that AT&Ts (previously SBC) high-dollar program to kill the municipal network was the first phase of establishing their own network. Their business plan could not handle the competition.
So, SBC bought AT&T, changed their name to AT&T, and now they're somehow working from a different game plan? I don't think so. They are now into phase 2 of their original plan.
I agree it won't get settled until the lawyers have thrashed it out through the courts. But, I'm with Geneva. 11-42-11 determines what Geneva must do. They have a duty to follow the law.
If AT&T delivers video, they should play by the same rules as the cableco.
From the actual law, Sec. 11-42-11(b):
The words "community antenna television system" shall mean any facility which is constructed in whole or in part in, on, under or over any highway or other public place and which is operated to perform for hire the service of receiving and amplifying the signals broadcast by one or more television stations and redistributing such signals by wire, cable or other means to members of the public who subscribe to such service; except that such definition shall not include (i) any system which serves fewer than fifty subscribers, or (ii) any system which serves only the residents of one or more apartment dwellings under common ownership, control or management, and commercial establishments located on the premises of such dwellings.
Edit: emphasis for terminology. | |
| | | | | Re: Terminology Issue From the actual law, Sec. 11-42-11(b):
The words "community antenna television system" shall mean any facility which is constructed in whole or in part in, on, under or over any highway or other public place and which is operated to perform for hire the service of receiving and amplifying the signals broadcast by one or more television stations and redistributing such signals by wire, cable or other means to members of the public who subscribe to such service; except that such definition shall not include (i) any system which serves fewer than fifty subscribers, or (ii) any system which serves only the residents of one or more apartment dwellings under common ownership, control or management, and commercial establishments located on the premises of such dwellings. What a train wreck of a definition.... Writing this text in a carrier independent way is really hard.
An IPTV System can pull off the local station feeds before they are broadcast and could do the encode at the station, so that the only thing sent to the IPTV system is a data feed. Would that be a video broadcast?
IPTV systems do not amplify the signal like a cable system does.
Does this statute also inhibit the ability of the local TV stations to put video clips of their broadcasts on their web sites to be viewed over the same data network as the IPTV video? Does it affect ESPN doing the same with sports clips if these were ever broadcast? Since the video is running over a data network, seemd like the data network would have to pay a franchise fee.
As stated, it also just affects the local broadcast stations, not the national providers like ESPN, Disney, HBO, etc as they are never "Broadcast"
So, an IPTV provider could just provide national feeds and bypass the local stations altogether with national network feeds. This isn't in the best interests of either, so would never happen.
As stated, does this regulate DBS since the satellites may be over a public space?
So, the city of Geneva would rather subject their citizens to higher cable rates than to allow more competition with the incumbents? | |
| | | | birdfeedrPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-11
Warwick, RI
kudos:5 | Re: Terminology Issue Actually, the full title of the Section 11-42-11 is:
(65 ILCS 5/11-42-11) (from Ch. 24, par. 11-42-11)
Sec. 11-42-11. Community antenna television systems; satellite transmitted television programming.
There are a number of mentions governing availability and pricing of satellite programming through the community antenna television system.
I think the operative phrase is "programming", not clips. A reasonable person reading the law thinks "program" and associates the implied "schedule". IPTV will qualify as programming.
The only people who would quibble over the meaning or intent of the law would be the ones trying to get around the law. In this case, I don't think very many are in that category except SBC, oops! AT&T, who want to have it all their way. Most of those who would profit in Geneva are trying to skirt the law and weasel out from under it.
I don't believe it includes the town government. They are looking at their duty, seeking to enforce it, trying to keep from being walked all over by AT&T. If they fail, what's to keep them (Geneva town government) from being sued by the people red-lined by AT&T? Or, for that matter, by Comcast, who is living under the franchise rules?
If it's video programming, ILPFA statute applies.
Check out the language of the law at this link »www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/il···+Code%2E | |
|
 DerchPremium
join:2004-10-16
Cross Plains, WI
·Charter
| You go Geneva. quote:
As is required in our existing franchises, we believe that our entire community should be treated equally.
I think I'm with Karl on this on. This city is trying to create services for all of their townsfolk. I think this places them in a unique situation to force AT&T to provide all or none. I only wish someone would do this sooner. | |
| | | Everytime this comes up about Geneva I will keep saying this SKIP OVER IT wire Chicago | |
|  viperpa33sWhy Me?Premium
join:2002-12-20
Bradenton, FL
1 edit | People would be up in arms I agree with the town on this one, either wire the whole town or you can't do business here. If a store did this, picked and chooses who they were going to serve, people would be up in arms. As long as AT&T is doing it, it's ok.
AT&T probably did there studies and figured the most affluent people will order the most services and spend more. Your average joe will scrutinize how much they are going to spend. | |
| | Odie97
join:2006-04-19
Oak Creek, WI | It's all in the Logo everyone keeps referring to the bad guys as AT&T in all this ... look closely at their new logo .... it is now at&t (all lower case).
We all need to remember ... this is the new, kinder and gentler at&t not those same SBC sob's.
At least that's what I was told by a former SBC exec. who is now an at&t exec ... hahahahahahaha
| |
|
| |
|
|
