Killing Broadband

[ECA]

http://www.networkingpipeline.com/blog/archives/2006/02/att_pays_off_co.html

AT&T has been using its considerable checkbook to pay off Congressman to ban cities and towns from setting up their own broadband and wireless networks. The top two recipients of AT&T campaign donations in 2006 have proposed laws to ban or dramatically curtail municipal networks.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/?p=913&part=rss&tag=feed&subj=zdblog

[dang]

doesnt surprise me. i think if municipal networks are setup, they shouldnt be undercutting other business out. Let say you owned your own book store, and the local government setup their own bookstore, which sold the same books, but at 50% of the retail price. You'd go out of business pretty fast.

[ECA]

But,
what of the reverse..
A small company that can Sell access in an area that the BIG company hasnt gotten to, or can give HIGH END service at a cheaper rate... and the Big company dont want the competition.

First highspeed service HERE, was very reasosnable, but had a $500 setup fee, because they were WIRELESS.. $40-50 1GBS
Then Cable came in, at $50
Finally ADSL, and they want $40..

[jtfields]

Let say you owned your own book store, and the local government setup their own bookstore, which sold the same books, but at 50% of the retail price. You'd go out of business pretty fast.

They do even better than that. How does "free" sound? It's called a "library". You should check one out some day. :poke

[dang]

library is free, but you pay for it through taxes. plus, you cant just plug your house into the library. The library is also using a company, like AT&T, Verizon, etc, backbone and fiber to get access there. Who do you think pays to have all that cable laid? It's not cheap to lay down miles of fiber.

[ECA]

Dang,

May not be cheap to lay fiber, but HOW many times do we have to pay for it??
SAMe with every telephone pole they put up..

[jtfields]

library is free, but you pay for it through taxes. plus, you cant just plug your house into the library. The library is also using a company, like AT&T, Verizon, etc, backbone and fiber to get access there. Who do you think pays to have all that cable laid? It's not cheap to lay down miles of fiber.

I wasn't referring to using internet access at your library. My "library" reference was a half joking jab at your book store analogy. I was just giving you a hard time as the one "what if" example you picked to make your point has basically already happened and book stores are doing just fine despite it (which is counter to the point you are trying to make.)

You asked how you would feel if you owned a book store and the government set up their own subsidized book store. The government has set up their own book stores in the form of libraries. Libraries aren't exactly stores but the fact that you can go to one and read just about any book for free, compliments of the government, is direct competition for book stores.

In any case, my personal opinion on these municipal networks is that they aren't fair. While my selfish side relishes the thought of free internet access, it definitely is not fair to the companies that have invested literally billions in infrastructure to provide these services. For some reason, when it comes to the internet everyone thinks everything from access to content should be free. It isn't free to provide these things so it isn't going to necessarily be free to get them.

[seans]

I think there are so many new ideas floating around and new ways of doing business that much of the "old" big business (points at ATT/etc & music/movie industry) are running around like chickens with the heads cut off trying to protect their old cash cows. The whole HDMI thing, the under the table banning of cheap/free broadband is all kneejerk reactions to small and new companies out-thinking the big guys. Granted there are parts of this that have to do with securing existing revenue models from misuse but that really is a small potatoes portion of the fear.

Hell this is history repeating itself, little general store owners and large department stores had their lobby in congress to not allow Sears & Robuck use of the US Postal Service in the late 1800's early 1900's when mail order started to be not only viable but a swifter way than special orders from brick and mortar shops.

Like the mailorder lobby 100 years ago the telecomm & content lobby will be loud -- they will get noticed -- they will buy off senators -- in the end they will loose to progress. The real question is when will they toss in the towel? I give them 5 years of infuance, 10 years of rabble rousing.