Baby Bells Promise Broadband Stagnation

twitter writes "According to this NYT article the Baby Bells will not be developing their 'high-speed networks' despite their recently granted DSL monopoly because they were not granted local phone monopolies. 'Here is a lot of crying crybaby reaction to the decision.' says Mr. Powell."

Comments

First Google link

[gpinzone]

FGL!

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/27/business/27FCC.h tml?ex=1046926800&en=669a995afe95f3f3&ei=5062&part ner=GOOGLE

A Future Bell Monopoly?

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's a look at the Bells' work to tax VoIP in a similar move to the ones they made in the early days of DSL. The eventual goal of moves like this would be to push non-Bells out of VoIP so they can then have yet another monopoly.

When will we(they?) learn

[doozer]

Government "watched" corporations are never going to provided the services users want
when they want them, how they want them.

The only way we are going to get broadband across the board is if the government mandates
it, and takes it upon themselves to install and run it. As soon as it's left up to
a corporation todo, they're going to not provide services to the customers that are expensive.
Why? Because thats the point of a corporation. They want to make a profit. Period.

Private corporations are not the ideal method of provided uniform services, because not
everyone can be served at uniform cost.

The sooner we realize this, and stop trying to privatize everything, we'll be better off

Market Flaw

[bludstone]

Looks like theres a flaw in the market.

They were handed a monopoly on a product, but refuse to develop it due to corporate greed. Im sorry, but this is bullshit. Theres a demand and the ONLY reason the supply isnt being filled is due to some perverted hyper-greed. Give people bandwidth dammit. It should be like gas, electricity, and water. A new utility.

Can the gvt just say "fine, were revoking your monopoly then." ?

Would they do it?

This pisses me off.

Gotta love this

[TopShelf]

A number of congressmen were overtly hostile on this point, including Representative Billy Tauzin, the Louisiana Republican who is the chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. Mr. Tauzin was critical of the regulatory role of the states. He argued that the ruling would result in 51 local procedures with 51 lawsuits and 12 different appeals courts, "ending up at the Supreme Court that ordered the deregulation in the first place."

But in a letter sent to Mr. Powell in June 2002, Mr. Tauzin himself wrote: "The commission must evaluate the rationale for requiring the unbundling of a network element based upon specific geographic and class-of-customer characteristics of individual markets across the nation. Uniform, national rules do not accurately reflect the state of competition and the unique economic characteristics of individual markets."

Gotta love the flip-flop action from Tauzin. It's not just the lawyers who'll get rich from these protracted legal battles - by tying this process up in Washington for years on end, the incumbents assure themselves lots of attention (and donations) from the parties on both sides of the issue. I have a feeling that we'll be hearing about this issue for only, say, another decade or so at this rate!

yet another reason..

[frenetic3]

to love verizon.

"hey, my dsl line went down two weeks ago. i opened up seventeen trouble tickets, and they were each mysteriously closed, but here's the number of the most recent --"
"would you like a new cell phone?"
"no, the ticket number is 131-"
"400 anytime minutes! nationwide long distance!"
"--055. er, you guys said --"
"oh, like call waiting?"
"-- that you'd send someone out yest --"
"i can add call waiting from here, sir!"
"-- erday to -- er, no --"
"ok, your line is activated for call waiting!"
"um, this is a data line. i have a --"
"the surcharge will be added to your monthly bill. and i'll go ahead and close up that trouble ticket for you. Thanks for using Verizon!"
*gunshot*

-fren

Re:The choice is theirs

[Wyntermute]

My guess is that you are sitting on a nice fat pipe there at your school. If you were one of the unfortunate ones that is stuck with dial-up because a giant conglomerate refuses to develop the technology in one monopoly because the government won't hand them another, I'm sure you would be calling foul on the Baby Bells as well.

These companies have a responsibility to the public. It would be one thing if they did not have the infrastructure to support broadband or develop it. But to have it and not develop it simply because they want to be the only player on the block seems very irresponsible to me. And yet, they find it surprising that many people are dropping their Baby Bell-owned lines in favor of cellular phones and cable modem. If they're going to oust other broadband development out of business, it becomes their responsibility to develop the technology for the consumer. Sure they're out to turn a profit - but what profit do they make just sitting in the corner like little children throwing temper tantrums over not having all the cookies in the cookie jar?

If the Bells were doing their job, there would be far fewer of your crybabys yelling about lack of broadband access, and the broadband access would likely be higher quality to boot. That would allow you to download your mp3s even faster.

Here's to hoping that you get stuck on an old dial-up connection when the lustre and safety of academia wear off....

They have NOT been granted a monopoly!

[DrunkBastard]

What's this about the FCC granting them a monopoly on DSL?!? All that the FCC said, in regards to dsl service, is that the incumbants no longer have to provide UNE-P's, or in slightly more laymans terms, they no long have to allow line-sharing of their phone servuced loops to ISPs. They still HAVE TO PROVIDE unbundled loop access (unless it's a fiber loop), for dedicated line services.

This puts a fairly heavy damper on line-shared ADSL services, but you know what? The incumbants still CAN NOT provided end user dsl services.

But what about services like Qwest DSL you ask? Qwest does NOT provide the internet bound portion of the service, they simply handle the local loop, then hand off the connection to another partnered ISP. It's called their MegaHost service. The so-called Qwest direct dsl is provided through MSN.

I really, really hate this mentalitly of complaining about prices, always wanting cheaper! cheaper! But at the same time calling for Better! Better! I should be able to have a 1 mbit up and down dsl connection, guaranteed speeds, guaranteed 24x7 for 5 dollars a month! Blah I say

Your argument doesn't hold water.

[sean.peters]

The ILECs have only themselves to blame for losing money on each DSL line. The terms of the original deregulation agreement were that the ILECs had to lease capacity to CLECs at the same rates as they leased them to their own broadband subsidiaries. Since they lease to their subsidiaries at below cost rates in an effort to make them appear more profitable, they are forced to offer the same artificially low price to their competitors. If they would stop whining about this situation and raise the rates for themselves as well as their competitors, maybe they wouldn't be in such a fix... but they'd rather cry to the government, hoping Uncle Sam will make the big bad Earthlinks of the world go away and leave them alone. Sean

Re:The choice is theirs

[murphyslawyer]

Okay, I am feeling the need to clear up a common misconception - neither the Baby Bells, or any other company, has any responsibility to the public whatsoever. Just because the public may have paid for some of the lines, they are not then forced to act in some manner which wouldn't be maximally profitable out of thanks if they are not contractually obligated. They have a responsibility to make money for their owners. That is why companies exist, to make money. They should use every legal means in their power to do so.

It is the government's job to force companies to act in a legal and socially moral way through regulation and to slap down those companies that get out of line. It is the job of the people to get the government to do so in the way they want.

Of course, having said that, corporations have far more power these days in determining what goes into regulations than the people, because the lawmakers have been bribed with fat donations, and nobody ever gets slapped down for breaking the rules.

Don't get upset with the corporations for acting like greedy little piggies. Get upset with the system that allows them to get away with it, and try to change it.