Slashdot Mirror

raygundan writes "According to Reuters, the FCC today decided to greatly curtail the laws that force incumbent phone companies to share their lines with their competition at cost. This does not bode well for companies like Covad Communications who provide DSL using phone lines to bridge their data networks over the "last mile" to customers. The new rules do force line sharing as long as companies are willing to offer voice service, but this essentially states that if you are not already a phone company, you cannot offer DSL. The existing rules will be phased out over three years. There is still some hope, however, that a federal court might strike down the FCC ruling. Oddly, the news agencies seem to be reporting this as a minor change to the rules, rather than an end to all non-ILEC competition in DSL." The FCC's front page has links (luckily PDFs as well as Microsoft Word files) about the decision, including statements from each of the commissioners.

ewhac writes "The San Francisco Chronicle is reporting that Covad, who filed for bankruptcy protection last year, is slowly regaining strength. With $246 million in cash, Covad claims it has enough to carry it to profitability. They've also struck a deal with AOL to provide high-speed connectivity to AOL customers. The battle isn't over, though, as Pacific Bell continues to undercut Covad's offerings. Covad is effectively Pacific Bell's only remaining competitor for DSL service. As a happy Covad customer through Speakeasy.net, I'm pleased I won't be forced into PacBell's or AT&T's hands any time soon."

A reader writes: "According to this Washington Post article, the FCC's Michael Powell wants to do via rulemaking what Congress wouldn't - give a big wet kiss to the Baby Bells. Proposed rules would exempt future investments in broadband from unbundling requirements that make competitive local exchange carriers like Covad viable, instead considering (pretending?) that cable, satellite, DSL, and whatever future broadband the Bells choose to deploy are sufficient competition. Says Powell: "our greatest challenge in promoting broadband is deciding how best to stimulate enormous private sector investment." Consumer advocates are of course not amused."

powerlord writes "All of us still rooting for Covad can let out that deep breath we've been holding. According to an article on the Seatle IP Wire Covad is set to emerge from bankrupcy. They claim they've managed to shed most of their debts and are concentrating on 50 major metropolitan areas right now. They expect 40 of the markets to be cash positive by year end, with the entire company cash positive by mid 2003. Their stock rose $0.75 to $1.39."

Logic writes: "According to their press release, Covad Communications Group, Inc. is preparing to file for Chapter 11 protection for restructuring. One of the most important points in the release is Covad Communications Group, Inc.'s operating companies, which provide DSL services to customers, are not expected to be included in the court-supervised proceeding and will continue to operate in the ordinary course of business without any court imposed restrictions,' meaning that the operating companies which deal with service providers (such as Speakeasy, who have endorsed Covad's action) will continue to operate unfettered by the court restrictions, and end-user services should be unaffected. Hopefully." As a Speakeasy customer (at home), I sincerely hope that my connection doesn't go away.

Logic writes: "According to their press release, Covad Communications Group, Inc. is preparing to file for Chapter 11 protection for restructuring. One of the most important points in the release is Covad Communications Group, Inc.'s operating companies, which provide DSL services to customers, are not expected to be included in the court-supervised proceeding and will continue to operate in the ordinary course of business without any court imposed restrictions,' meaning that the operating companies which deal with service providers (such as Speakeasy, who have endorsed Covad's action) will continue to operate unfettered by the court restrictions, and end-user services should be unaffected. Hopefully." As a Speakeasy customer (at home), I sincerely hope that my connection doesn't go away.

Covad is in the news this week for unplugging ISPs who didn't pay their bills. Covad, in a partly helpful, partly self-serving gesture, has attempted to get disconnected customers hooked up with other ISPs using Covad's service. Oddly enough, the submissions seem to blame Covad - it looks to me like the ISP was the one to blame, taking subscriber payments but not paying off Covad. Covad's financial situation is best described as precarious, with one-third of all its DSL customers not paying - Covad's trying to throw off the dead-weight. So what's the deal with CLEC ^[?] 's these days? Is there any hope of survival against the incumbent phone companies who will do anything to squash competition?

drut asks: "Due to a power surge last week, I lost my link at home. As a result of this, I've learned the frustrating truth of how my DSL provider processes its work orders that have to deal when the actual DSL line is involved. My provider, Flashcom, works with Covad and Bell Atlantic to give me Internet access. Due to legal issues involved in the ownership of the physical phone lines, I spent a week just having them go through the red tape of contacting one company, having them issue a work order with another company, then having the second company issue a work order with the third company, making me three times removed from the problem. Because of this system, no one at the first (Flashcom) or second (Covad) companies have any idea of the status of the problem, and don't have any contact information for the third company (Bell Atlantic). With all this hassle, next time I sign up for DSL (maybe I'll switch to cable), I'll probably sign up directly with the phone company, if they offer the service. This seems like an unfair advantage to the other companies. " Has anyone else had problems like this?