WP,pg1: Fast Internet Service for The People:Telecoms Fight Public Plans

[DeepModem Mom]

Fast Internet Service for The People
Telecoms Fight Plans For Public Networks

By Jonathan Krim
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, December 2, 2004; Page A01


For the millions of people who cannot afford high-speed Internet access, some local officials think they've hit on the answer: Build government-owned networks to provide service at rates below what big telecommunications companies charge.

From San Francisco to St. Cloud, Fla., an estimated 200 communities are toying with community-owned networks, sparking a battle with cable and telephone companies over how public, or private, access to the Internet should be.

The companies are lobbying furiously to block such plans, fearful that their businesses would be hurt. Their efforts most recently paid off Tuesday night in Pennsylvania, where a new law bans local governments from creating their own networks without first giving the primary local phone company the chance to provide service.

Consumer advocates denounce the new Pennsylvania law. They say it amounts to governments now needing a permission slip from entrenched monopolies to put a vital economic and educational tool within everyone's reach....


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26409-2004Dec1.html

[napi21]

1. My son had a public based internet service at his last house.

He lives in Newnan Ga. and the HS internet service was through Newnan Utilities. He paid $10.99 a month! It wasn't quite as fast as what I have through the cable company, but close enough to be GREAT FOR THE PRICE! I pay $49.99!!!

I have no idea how the utility worked this out. This service is not available in all parts of Newnan, and when he moved a year ago, his only option was the same cable service I have (120 mi away) or go with some dial-up service.

I can sure understand why the phone & cable companies would fight this, but they could always offer a faster premium service, and the communities could a basic HS service, similar to broadcast TV v/s cable.

[Sporadicus]

3. I Get High Speed Internet Service Through My Local Utility Too

Your son has the sweetest deal I've ever seen, but even my $25 monthly bill doesn't seem that bad compared to other sources. All utility companies should press forward with developing HS internet for the masses at reasonable prices.

[annabanana]

2. While I applaud universal internet access..............

What the government gives, the government can control and take away.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

4. On the other hand...

When you look at the promises the big telcos and RBOCs made, during the runup to the 1996 Telecom dereg act, versus what they have delivered, versus the effect on your bills...

Pretty fucking dismal. People should be going to jail for lying to congress.

[highnooner]

5. The telcos (in general) did pay

for the infrastructure. Shouldn't they be able to make a profit? However, faster, better, cheaper is the credo of the day. So, what's good for the goose.....

[Dogmudgeon]

7. Many of these bills are aiming at WIRELESS service

Philly just had a spat with Verizon -- you know, James Earl Jones' boss -- since Mayor Street wanted to build a low-cost, high-speed wireless internet infrastructure. Verizon argued that they deserved to recoup their soon-to-be lost investment in copper wires and fiber optics.

Hey, Darth -- what do I deserve after sinking thousands of bucks, thousands of hours of work, and considerable hopes and dreams into a computer-programming career that was gut-shot by the same brand of (un)free enterprise?

Interesting side note: Comcast, ususally Hitler to Verizon's Mussolini, is sitting this one out. But they also want a hefty tax break from the city. Strange bedfellows, especially when the sodomists turn down a chance to bugger the public.

--p!
Only for a chance at a bigger buggering later on, of course.

[kysrsoze]

12. Not sure what you're seeing, but the RBOCs aren't all that bad

Latest ads are between $20 and $27 per month, depending on what services you get, for high-speed. That's not bad when you consider they actually built their network while companies like NetZero and Netscape charge $15/mo for their "high-speed" (cached text) offerings and AOL is $25/mo for dial-up. Long-distance is basically a commodity now, with little profit. LD used to be $.25 a minute and now it's about $.05 or an unlimited plan.

They're also investing like mad in the infrastructure for IPTV. You can be as mad as you want at companies like Comcast for ripping people off, but the Telcos are actually a pretty good deal.

[Dogmudgeon]

6. The Pennsylvania Monopoly Protection Act of 2004

Philadelphia recently got a permission slip from Verizon to build a cheap-rate or free wireless high-speed internet after a flood of protest. However, they say that they "reserve the right" to determine who can and can't follow suit. Which means that they will resume enforcing their private little law as soon as it falls off the radar.

They don't understand computer people, though. The first time they try to bring the hammer down on a community freenet, they are going to ignite another firestorm, and if they do it when another utility is enforcing a private law, they are going to "cook off" the entire Whoop-Ass canning factory.

Maybe they should talk to someone from the Crutch of $ciento1oqy about the consequences of trying to coerce net activists.

--p!
Forgive the "1337" ('Leet) spelling -- it's to foil the Church's legal net-bots.

[TO Kid]

8. Who pays?

If the freenet is running on donations then the ISPs should back off, but if they're being funded through taxes then I can understand why they're upset. I sure don't appreciate having to pay my competitors. Yes, I know the telcos are also on the take but that's the subject of a whole 'nother thread.

[Dogmudgeon]

10. The Consumers and Net Users

I personally don't care whether the companies feel put-upon by Big Gummint. Let them gripe all they want -- just like the long-suffering consumers. Verizon only ceded the point because they knew they would lose thier case higher up in the legal food chain.

I thought that the mantra was that Private Enterprise could always do things better than Big Gummint. In the case of public utilities, it looks like that wasn't quite true. Verizon can't even get DSL service to my house, but they want to make sure that nobody else can, either (excepting only pricey Comcast, who would pound them into dust if they tried).

Verizon had a special law passed that allowed them to monopolize a public utility and, in a sense, print money with the blessing of the local government. They have no right to complain when that same government provides a service that they can't, or won't.

--p!

[grilled onions]

9. the spying plan

I would think it would make it easier for them to monitor who's on line,what they say and what web sites they go to. Would they also start shutting down or blocking sites less kind to the ones in charge?????

[TO Kid]

11. Good point

Most people who want the gov't to control or provide services tend not to think of what could happen when the other side takes over.