http://consumeraffairs.com/news03/fcc_cable.html
Appeals likely. :cry:
I don't expect much change from this. First, it only applies in the 9th Circuit. Second, the FCC already has tentatively decided to use its forbearance authority to avoid the effect of the ruling.
[size=2]Edited to remove that damned extra "e" I always want to put in "forbearance"[/size]
What is forebearance authority?
Under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the FCC can "forbear" regulation of telecom carriers or services. They are supposed to first determine that regulation is not necessary to ensure reasonable rates, protect consumers, or otherwise promote the public interest. It was included to give the FCC some leeway in applying rules to emerging technologies.
So here, the rule might say, "share your lines," but the FCC can forbear enforcement of that rule. Without enforcement, there is no rule.
I, for one, would welcome some competition in the Cable field. This whole local monopoly thing is getting old.
The Cable Act prohibits exclusive cable franchises. However, since cable systems are expensive to build, we don't see many places where more than one system is constructed (known as an "overbuild"). It was starting to happen in lots of places before the telecom stock market crashed, but now only a few overbuilders are left and they aren't building very quickly. Pasadena, CA is the biggest overbuild market I'm familiar with. They had Charter as the incumbent, now Altrio is overbuilding.
RCN is also another major overbuilder -- but most of their stuff is on the East Coast, I think.Originally Posted by Supertanker
Supertanker, do you practice telecom law, or is this just a hobby for you? :)
Grande Communications seems to be doing some of this "overbuilding" (in competition with Time Warner) out here in Austin... unfortunately, hasn't hit my neighborhood as yet.
Yep, I represent cities and other public agencies on a variety of telecom issues, including cable franchise negotiations. Since I just had it updated, here's my professional profile.
The 9th Circuit court is the most overturned circuit court in the nation. I'd pretty much take this as a sign from God that the ruling will go the other way when it gets to the Supremes.
Bzzt.
Wow, 2.5 cases per 1000 cases heard. Boy, those guys sure do have problems.The high court's reversal or return of 119 cases constituted fewer than 1.5 reversals per 1,000 circuit decisions.
For the 9th Circuit, the ratio was 2.5 per 1,000. But the Chicago-based 7th Circuit, with eight judges appointed by Republicans and three by Democrats, had virtually the same ratio.
It may be the most overturned court in the country -- its also the biggest. Its overturn rate isn't out of line.
Next conservative myth, please.
Aren't cable providers running a service over an infrastructure they built themselves? I don't see why they should have to allow other companies to sell bandwidth on their network. This isn't like dial up where anyone can dial a local number and stay on the line as long as they want.
The cable companies argue that, and the "open access" people argue that cable's effective monopoly eliminates competition to the consumer's detriment. I've seen a lot of what I think is anti-competitive behavior by cable companies.
The phone companies also argue that they built their networks and should get to close them like cable does. However, they are conveniently forgetting that they built them over decades while enjoying monopoly status, condemnation power, and regulated rates that guaranteed a return on investment.
Telecom law is a real crazy quilt right now. It needs fundamental reform, but there are so many powerful lobbies involved that we could end up with something worse.
It's times like these I wonder if it wouldn't be a good idea for the goverment to just buy out all the cable and phone ground in the States, and then lease it to companies at a standard rate and let them tear each other to pieces from there.
But then the conspiracy theorist in me freaks out at the idea of the government owning all the lines and all the potential Alien abuctions they could orchestrate with that power.*
But seriously, what would be a proper alternative that would allow competition without disenfranchising the very companies that paid the money to put the cable down?
*TWAJS.
Ah, you know what. Here's an even better crackpot theory.
GOVERNMENT CHEESE.
Erm.
I mean.
GOVERNMENT BROADBAND.
I mean, seriously. Fuck universal health care. I want free cable and phone access. In every home. In America.
It's hella cheaper than universal medicare, and who's gonna notice a nasty tumorous growth when they got 3 Megabit downstream and 500 up?
Golly. What I get for believing what I read. Thanks for the info.
I want government fiber to my curb!
I'm tellin' ya man, it's genius.
Wait. No. If everyone has unrestricted, unfettered, high-speed access to the internet...they'll learn all the truths in the world...
Drugs aren't necessarily bad for you!
Gun ownership is not the root cause of violent crime!
Video games don't cause violent behavior!
The magic bullet theory is a bunch of shit!
Roosevelt might have let Pearl Harbor happen to mobilize the people towards fighting World War II!
Lincoln NEVER CHOPPED DOWN A CHERRY TREE!
Oh christ....we can't have that happening.
Let's just run them free cable and replace all their news with a sanitized version of Fox News. Then we'll be golden.
Beats me. The current telecom patchwork seems to be an absolute mess.
We need some examples of other countries that have insane broadband customer bases.
Singapore, if memory serves me, is the most wired nation in the world. We need to get a list of the top 5 countries in broadband penetration, look at what they're doing, and improve on it.
Seems rather straightfoward to me.
So does anybody know a good place to look into this data?
I thought N. Korea was the top one, but if not, it's surely in the top 5.
Singapore is also 13900 times smaller than the United States.
Yes, this is true, but surely there's something we could learn from them.Singapore is also 13900 times smaller than the United States.
[size=1]*cough*weneedtoincreasethepopulationdensityandstop buildingallthesegoddamnsuburbanretardedareas*cough *[/size]
That would be SOUTH Korea, with broadband supposedly being in over 50% of homes there. Grapevine says that the north's been a little short on luxury for a while.
That's exactly what I was thinking; population density is an important factor in broadband availability. If you look at dense urban communities in the US, broadband can have very high penetration. I know a few areas around here that are 100%, with the option of cable or DSL. Drive 20 miles from there into the rural farming area, and it drops to zero. If it is less than about 40 homes to the mile, it isn't going to be served anytime soon (unless people do it themselves, which is happening in a number of places).
OTTER: "Lincoln"?
BOONE: Forget it, he's rolling.
It's possible he's referencing Scott McCloud's New Adventures of Abraham Lincoln. I stress the 'possible', which ideally I would have already done using a bold or italic typeface in the previous sentence, but lacking a copy editor I'll just tack on this sentence to do so.OTTER: "Lincoln"?
BOONE: Forget it, he's rolling.
My bad. I kept thinking that was where Garriot ended up.That would be SOUTH Korea, with broadband supposedly being in over 50% of homes there. Grapevine says that the north's been a little short on luxury for a while.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote