Slashdot Mirror
Verizon, Copper, Fiber, and the Truth
Alexander Graham Cracker writes "Starting last spring, reports began surfacing of Verizon routinely disabling copper as it installed its fiber-based FiOS service. We discussed the issue here a couple of times. In my experience, every time Verizon has installed FiOS at a friend's house, they have insisted they have to cut off the copper and move the POTS to the fiber. By doing so, they block anyone else such as COVAD or Cavalier from renting the copper for competitive access. Sources report that today, at a hearing of the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, Verizon executive VP Thomas Tauke denied ever doing that. (The transcript should be up in a day or so. The AP coverage does not mention this detail.) I wonder if Rep. Markey's staff is interested in hearing from people who experienced Verizon disabling copper, and without notice?"
So they're blocking off potential competitors? At least it's spurring the move to Fiber Optic...
When I switched from cable internet to FiOS earlier this year I was told that had to permanently cut the copper wire to my house. So I now have fiber phone service. Works fine, except for the short delay that always occurs between picking up the phone and using it. They also put a battery in my basement to give me eight hours of phone service during a power outage.
The most rabid believers in American Exceptionalism are the exact same people whose policies are destroying it.
All someone would need to do to validate these claims would be to bring in a competitor and have them try to offer services through said copper. It would be hearsay to make a statement without something other than a "word of mouth" to back up a claim. Doing so - bringing in an alternative provider - provides irrefutable proof. However being crafty I can think of an instance where someone @ Verizon can make an argument charging that the copper coming into the home was causing some form of crosstalk which caused attenuation issues and required the copper being "disabled". Note the intentional use of "disabled" as opposed to "cut". I personally could see some twobit Verizon shlum doing something stupid on their own accord. "If we cut the copper John we never have to worry about losing our job!"
Infiltrated dot Net
Nope, my pennies still seem to work..
"A nation that forgets its past is doomed to repeat it." - Churchill
Ummm, maybe it would have made sense to hold off on this story until it's found to be true, instead of telling us that "sources report" something that's not in the linked article? Far be it from me to doubt Alexander Graham Cracker's "sources", but just on principle...
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
Talk to any person who got FIOS in Florida and you'll see they cut the cable. What does this guy want, pictures of the line before and after? That's easy to do.
Wheel of Time: Book by Book and Sumview (summary review) Bigdady92 style: http://bigdady92.blogspot.com/
This is why the company that provides telephone service should be a separate company from the one that maintains the wires. Same with power. Same with cable.
Guess you didn't bother to read the argument put forth in the summary.
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
They left my copper in, because it was too difficult to remove. However, even when he was trying to do so , I was well aware he was going to remove the copper.
I generally stick around when contractors are rewiring my house, but I suppose if you're not one of those people, it may come as a surprise. It's probably one of those things on the checklist of stuff to mention, and it doesn't happen sometimes. I've had friends get fiber, be told they're removing the copper, asked them to not remove it, and there were no problems.
Also, I had a bird's nest of copper in my house. I got FiOS so my phone and internet would be over a clear digital connection, and it hasn't gone down since the day it went in (early this summer). I could care less about the speed.
What I want to know is why Covad can't run their own lines to your home themselves. Sure, copper is expensive, and so is labor to run it, but if you offer a competitive service and provide for your customers, they tend to stick with you for years and years. What's preventing Covad from just dropping their own cables city by city? Let's forget any laws that force Verizon to allow competitors to use THEIR copper, and focus on why competitors can't have THEIR OWN copper, or fiber.
Copper infrastructure was mostly paid for by government granted monopolies. In return, it was a tariffed service that the telcos had to lease to anyone, in a non-discriminatory way.
Yes, they had to lease to their competitors. That was the price of the gov't granting them a monopoly.
Fiber is paid for by the telcos, not the gov't so is not a tariffed service. While Verizon MUST lease copper to competitors, it isn't compelled to lease fiber access. Verizon cutting the copper is effectively cutting off any competition that was not a Baby Bell in a past life.
No, they can't just reconnect it. The copper is cut on BOTH ends -- telco CO and house. Feel free to reconnect one end, but they aren't required to let you hook it back up in their CO.
The only reason Verizon and AT&T and the others can afford to pay to lay the fiber is the wealth that was created by their guaranteed monopoly.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
Sources report that today, at a hearing of the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, Verizon executive VP Thomas Tauke denied ever doing that.
In congress' opinion, this is a non-issue, as long as Verizon leaves the tubes intact.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
Or further up the line? Because the Telco is responsible up to the demarcation point, after which, it is the customer's wiring. Which side are they cutting? How significant is this cutting? Whole sections, or just a snip here to isolate the premise wiring in preparation of new equipment installation?
Verizon has always lied about how they handle their physical connections.
:-/... so yeah I'm not surprised by this at all.
Back in the day they kept telling me that I could get DSL only to cancel my order without notice. That happened 4 time over 6 months before I finally got a guy that would admit that they had run out of DSLAM ports. I couldn't believe that it took six months to find out that they couldn't keep up with demand so they were just canceling my accounts. Sadly they were the only option I had so I kept at it until I finally got a connection.
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed H
The sad part is that they are only doing this for one reason:
Scrap copper money.
In a world where a company will do anything to keep wall street and its investors happy, they have decided to make money off the scrap copper now that they are going fiber optic.
Actually, they are now looking into scrap fiber optic for the next generation.
Verizon's telco predecessors made that capital investment with gov't guaranteed monopolies. In short, it really ISN'T Verizon's copper, it is copper paid for by taxes and a gov't granted monopoly. It is national infrastructure.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
As someone who has FIOS, the difference in service is clear. With copper I was free to choose my ISP. I chose a very, very good local mom and pop ISP. With Fiber I'm stuck with Verizon.
The technology may be more modern, but the terms of service are in the stoneage. It would be better in the long run if the terms of service were forcibly opened, as with copper, since they don't appear willing to open them voluntarily.
This is something of a reversal of history though. Verizon didn't deploy the stuff until they got a waiver of the copper rules requiring they open them to other ISPs. They were active in closing the terms of service and the government went right along with them.
Bastards.
Evil people are out to get you.
We had FIOSS put in because the 7 MB/sec line was faster and cheaper than the T-1. They not only cut our copper, but they dug up and removed most of the copper cabling from the neighborhood. They said that with the price of copper, it would be recycled and it would keep it from being stolen since it wasn't being used anymore. It sounded suspicious to me, but I stood in what was then my front yard and watched them do it.
2 cents,
Queen B.
HDGary secures my bank
If this is happening on a wide scale, then is it a crime? Seriously.
Whomever is parading in front of whatever subcommittee can plausibly deny it, so a slap on the wrist is the maximum penalty. Copper is still cut. The worst thing that could ever happen is an over-eager schmuck will "fall on the sword" and lose his job.
Based on my friend who performs fiber installs to the home for the local telco, It's more or less outside the scope of the job order. Is he the kind of guy that would just leave the copper alone and call the install done despite what the work order may say? Yes. Is it happening? Maybe.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
I'm outta mod points... just when I need them...
All this is well and good. But for the thousands of CLECs, Competitive Local Exchange Carriers, they are out of luck. What Verizon and other incumbent carriers need is to be forced, because otherwise they won't, to sell dark fiber like they had to sell unbundled copper loops. Without this unbundled copper there would be no speakeasy or other non-bell dsl carriers.
... that we don't have multiple companies creating their own parallel toll-roads: it's a horribly inefficient use of a limited resource (space). And just like toll-roads, the initial investment is high and pays off best when there is no competition. The first one to gather the resources to build the first road/connection gets to enjoy advantages that anyone coming after them won't have, such as an existing revenue stream, sticky customers, mind-share, being the standard, etc.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
spring, reports began surfacing of Verizon routinely disabling copper as it installed its fiber-based FiOS service
Last spring? I had FiOS installed in early to mid 2005 and the installer asked to remove my copper. At the time I hadn't yet cancelled my T1. But for that I've no doubt he'd have removed it.
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
Contracts and space. There is only so much space on the public utility right of way, and between the cable, telco, and power services, it's pretty much used. Right now, there are places in MA where the FIOS lines are being attached to extensions over the pole, and techs getting electricuted because of it.
As for the contracts, the only way to be profitable is to play a numbers game - it takes an average of 3-6 months to break even for a given customer - so you need LOTS of customers to cover your churn, and that means lots of municipalities. Trying to make an individual contract with each municipality is a nightmare for both the physical plant people & the legal department.
... they've introduced a new rule.
As long as you link previous articles once or twice in the summary, it's fine to post dupes!
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
the problem here, is that verizon is bringing in FIOS to those communities who allow them to change the twisted pair monopoly to a fiber monopoly WITH no competition from old twisted pair. So, there are only 2 choices to these homes (most all of the cable contracts do not require resellers be allowed). I am guessing that it will require a new president who is not part of the establishment (perhaps paul or obama) who will do the right thing as opposed to what brings their party more money.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
First off. I do not have FiOS. I probably would if I lived somewhere where it was offered because of the potential bandwidth opportunities. I have discussed the network that Verizon is setting up with some of my buddies who install for them. It appears to be a type of glass threw connection over a single strand for hundreds of households. It is prone to dB loss and don't even think about pulling the specs for the splices and couplers that they are using. It is a great idea and a very telco like implementation. I fully understand running more than one user on a single strand of fiber however they are running hundreds with high db loss and compensating with repeaters. I guess if I was going to do it I would have simply ran a larger bundle of fibers to a neighborhood and broke it apart there. That would allow for vast expansion on the part of the telco. I could spend the rest of the afternoon discussing this but it appears to me that more planning and a better execution would be a smart play for everyone. As far as removing the copper... I don't really care either way. They are removing it to the pole in my yard and if I decide to change the telco will just re-run new line...
These days Copper market is up, likely they view it as a money saving issue. They want to keep the copper tubes from eroding as data goes thru them. (what did you think that series of Tubes was made from???)
You know what a series of copper tubes gets you at the recycle place? Being really frugal gets you that Villa in Tuscany.
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
You would think that wires run to the closest exchange, but that is not always the case. I saw a case at USWest (LONG ago), where the closest exchange was across the street, but because it was added later, our wires ran several miles up the road.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Color me cynical, but what do you suggest when the whole election process has been subverted to the point that only pro-business candidates ever seem to get far enough to be voted upon? Seriously, when was the last time a truly progressive (and I don't mean "liberal", I mean "working for positive change for more than the candidate's own pocketbook") candidate made it through all the primaries and other BS to reach the ballot with any serious chance of gaining office? A few third parties have historically made it to the ballot, but by the time of the election, they've been painted with such a broad brush of unacceptabilty by the media and the two entrenched parties that they haven't stood much of a chance. Armed revolution has been brought up a few times as one possible option, but it really looks to me like the vast majority of the country is either too apathetic or too enamoured of the status quo to go that far. People aren't poor and pinched enough yet to really get motivated.
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
Governments are as governments are. So they agreed to Verizon's request now, but what's to say that once Verizon makes this investment that they won't turn around and demand similar clauses to lease to competitors once the infrastructure is in place? Assuming that is what the game is, it's a perfect play of a business.
Of course, it could be an elitest establishment buying into some sham, failing to recall the public good as their motivation. Somehow, I bet the latter. (sigh)
What's good about the preservation of a monopoly? I appreciate that Verizon is trying to provide better speeds via fiber (assuming the feeder trunk equipment allows it), but why are they destroying existing functionality? It's obviously to eliminate the possibility of competition.
Please remember that this is the SAME company that requires a special firmware version for cell phones that disables any way for the phone to talk to your computer directly. They then get the advantage of your data transfers having to occur over their net.
I live too far from the central office to get DSL. My ONLY option right now is cable via Comcast. Since Qwest is the local carrier, fiber isn't even a near term option.
While I agree that capitalism drives efficiency (a good thing for us consumers), it has to have real competition for that to occur. Cutting the copper is one way of preventing it.
To those of you who say "other carriers can just build their own infrastructure", you're being totally unrealistic. The current infrastructure was enabled by a government sanctioned monopoly. It's also why most cities have only one cable operator. For the buildout cost to be justifiable, they had to have a guarantee of a longterm return on investment. So, they got that. In many cases, the government even subsidized the buildout directly or by mandating right of way access for the cabling.
No competitor is going to get that now that existing infrastructure is in place. The most we can do is mandate the sharing of the existing infrastructure at a near cost level. While that WAS the case, wonderful internet access providers like Speakeasy sprang up. I miss them a lot.
Fiber == Future. Copper == Past. This is the idea of capitalism, we want an even playing field for companies so that they can edge out the competition with better prices/ideas. Verizon is doing that, and quiet well.
If things really were free, you would be right. They are not and you are selling yourself out. It was a sin for government to grant Ma Bell a monopoly. To undo that sin, the public servitude must be liberated and the Bell holdings must be dissolved. The other answer is to have a completely public network that everyone can use. Any combination of the two will favor one company over the others and this is why US networks have gone from world supremacy to third rate status. Verizon is doing what they are doing so that others won't be able to serve you. When they are finished robbing you of choice they will take your freedom.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
Wasn't the installation of some of the copper phone wiring subsidized, especially in rural areas? If so, it seems like VZ owes the subsidy back.
When I had mine installed (twice - I have two ONTs, one for business and one for personal) I had them leave the copper. The guy told me it was no problem. For the second install when I asked I was told that they always leave the copper because MA law requires them to offer E911 service over it. Other co-workers in the area have said the same. There was a 1 year gap between my two installs, so perhaps you got your installed before they stopped pulling the copper? Did you even ask them not to pull the copper?
Summary: They used to pull the copper unless you asked them not to. Now they don't pull it ever because it's against the law (in Massachusetts). If you already had a third-party DSL circuit on your copper before you got FiOS installed, they would leave your copper too, since the existing circuit was being used.
As an aside, the battery they provide only keeps voice online. Data and TV aren't covered. I keep my ONTs hooked up to an APC BackUPS 4500 which keeps it and my underclocked (Athlon 1400+ running at 700mhz) server running for about 36 hours. That way my mail & web server stays online, I can use my laptop to access the internet and my TiVo doesn't miss anything, even if the power is out.
Lastly, if you have FiOS internet, why not get Vonage, or another VoIP phone service? More features, less money, and you already have the battery-backup issue anyway.
Yes, they are explicitly trying to block Covad's ADSL2. Here's a link:
http://speakeasy.net/business/adsl2/
Notice that 15 Mbps is far better than what the Telco's are offering. ATT in particular, who will only give you 6 Mbps for Internet access, out of the 100 Mbps that their U-Verse lines are capabable of.
Also note that ADSL2 is only now just being rolled out to select areas, and is for business. Once competition heats up, the price will drop.
Sigh. I wish I had it now.
So yes, keep your copper lines.
I know this because I was trying to get fiber, then found a huge long thread on Usenet as to why there's no fiber in Sunnyvale, where I live and work: basically the telcos are trying to squeeze all the money they can out of old infrastructure, without investing in new.
This left me with cable and DSL. I don't want Comcast cable internet because they filter BitTorrent. I operate a torrent tracker for legal music downloads, so I need to use BitTorrent just to check that my tracker and seed are up.
DSL seemed to out as well because I'm over three miles from the phone office. I was very surprised that something hadn't already been done to make DSL available to silicon valley residents. I'm sure there are ways they could extend the range of DSL in an affordable way.
Finally I found Stephouse which, through COVAD, offers IDSL. That's DSL over ISDN, and I'm just within range. It's what I have now.
Request your free CD of my piano music.
Because if the telcos know they'll have to share fiber they won't put it in. It makes sense to have the fiber in before requiring it be open.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Anyone who doesn't think this is a crime is a moron. *We* paid for this indirectly by subsidizing telco monopolies with our tax dollars. Also, isn't Verizon the company that has tried to stop the 700MHZ auction through legal auction? They are bending over backwards to try and eliminate competition. It's painfully obvious and it really pisses me off. As for that right-wing troll who complains about Markey being a socialist, I wish I could put him in a factory before the Sherman Act of 1890. I bet we wouldn't hear him complaining about socialist tendencies then. Furthermore, is it really 'anti-business' if the government is trying to encourage *competition* ? Think about it moron. What you really should be complaining about is Verizon and their ilk taking money from the cookie jar that is the Universal Service Fund which is *supposed* to guarantee service to rural areas - $4B out of our pockets *every year*. Have you ever tried using your cell phone in a remote area? Do you think you can get high-speed internet in Bald Knob, Arkansas? I seriously doubt it. Futhermore, Verizon won the $10B Federal IWN contract *and* wants to get more government money from the USF for the 700MHZ spectrum. Their gall knows no bounds. If you are a true republican you should be complaining about all this pork and the pig that is Verizon. Quadraginta, *please* STFU!
It's never good to get the coppers angry.
By doing so, they block anyone else such as COVAD or Cavalier from renting the copper for competitive access.
In my experience, copper CAN'T compete with Fiber. Does that mean that this really doesn't apply?
If i had one dollar for every brain you dont have, i would have $1.
Several techie friends say they have gotten their copper left active with a FIOS install by ordering "Data Only FIOS" by phone (not online), and being VERY persistent, both in ordering and at install time. YMMV.
I accidentally got my ex's copper left active because I still had the phone account in my name when she got the FIOS installed in her name, so there was an active phone number on the copper that they didn't have permission to touch.
I let them cut the copper when FIOS was installed in my new townhouse, and in my case they cut it off just below ground level, and didn't dig up the buried copper.
2 reasons to want copper are:
1) Copper stays live during long power outages, because the telco provides the power on it, while POTS over fiber depends on a limited runtime battery backup (unless you provide your own backup to that)
2) Some alarm companies still require copper lines (not normally a technical need, more a headspace problem).
Another reason Verizon wants to switch to fiber is for maintenance - fiber has a fewer and cleaner failure modes than copper, and they can remotely locate many fiber breaks to within inches or at least feet. Fiber mostly either works or doesn't, while copper can degrade multiple ways: increased resistance, bad connections, insulation breaking, crosstalk, water damage, etc.
That said, this city was a test market for FIOS, and I know a number of people who did have their copper removed when the service was installed, in some cases despite their specific request that it be left intact. My sense is that the bad publicity associated with the removal of the copper caused a policy shift...Verizon has other reasons to want people to use FIOS, after all, and in this area their main competition is cable rather than alternate DSL providers. FIOS is the superior service, so improving uptake pays even if they don't reclaim the legacy last mile.
And who told you that you can't allow a competitor to run a new cable to your property? It wasn't Verizon who made a regulation making them the sole provider -- it was your local and State government. Don't be mad at Verizon because your government is completely fraudulent and corrupt -- if you vote, kick everyone out on the next election, and keep doing it until someone removes the monopoly provisions.
Actually the best way to deal with a Natural Monopoly like landlines is to separate the infrastructure from services. Maybe instead of a business owning the infrastructure local governments, nonprofits, or business can own it but then they are required to allow open access. This is what's being done in northeastern Utah with a Broadband Utopia. A group of communities in the area built the infrastructure and allows anyone to offer any services it is capable of. It could be internet access, phone service, "cable" tv, or any combination (Triple Play". How would you like a 30 megabit per second, mps, connection? That's what's available now however speeds could get to 100mps.
Should there be a Law?
They do not just rip out your copper. They ask if you want to keep it or not. Yes they generally default to deactivating the copper lines and cutting them, but it was quite common on broadbandreports.com to hear of many folks who said, they were asked, or they simply said to the installer to leave it.
In southern Maine, there are some competitive CLECs. If Verizon were to roll out FiOS and strip the copper, they would not be able to offer the competitive service they can now via DSL.
And they are competitive. One in particular was advertising that it was faster than cable. Time-Warner threatened to sue, basically saying 'no your not!' The CLEC, GWI, said 'bring it on!'.
No suit.
Stripping the copper locks out any of your CLEC competitors. Nice work, if you can make it stick. And more to the point, if it's true and you're bigwigs are denying it, let them walk the plank.
I'm pretty sure that a protracted hearing on subsidies, copper, and deception would make for high drama. it might not change much, but it sure would be fun, for at least a few months.
Then again... my captcha: 'muddied' hehe.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
but they dug up and removed most of the copper cabling from the neighborhood. They said that with the price of copper, it would be recycled and it would keep it from being stolen since it wasn't being used anymore. It sounded suspicious to me, but I stood in what was then my front yard and watched them do it.
The copper may of been taken out to prevent competition but it's still a good idea to recycle the copper. As for whether it was taken out for anticompetitive reasons, I don't see how. I may be wrong but I think they only need to be open if they use the copper, if they don't then no one can use it.
FalconShould there be a Law?
In my case, they cut from the demarc to the telephone pole (as the rest of the block is mostly Cu.
The Cu end of the Fibre-Cu interface plugged into the old plug in my demarc box.
So, the old demarc (aka telco box) had screws which coupled the wire to a RJ-45(?, I forget which standard is Ether and which one is telco, but you get the idea) male plug. This male plug then went into a 1st female plug in the telco box. My house wiring terminated as a male RJ-45 plug which went into a 2nd female plug in the telco box. There is some switch which only connects the 1st & 2nd plug when the box is closed (as I found out when re-wiring the house and testing my new phone wires).
The Fibre-Cu interface has a male Cu RJ-45 that then plugs into the 1st female plug in the telco box.
Ideally, they would place the back-up supply directly across the wall from the Fibre-Cu interface (think sandwich with the wall in the middle). They punch a hole through the wall for the cord for the back-up to the Fibre-Cu. Once again, ideally all of this would be in your garage.
In my 1935 no-garage house, we had to do some finagling (which I directed).
And, yes they told me ahead of time that they were cutting the Cu.
I would mark you as a moron and a troll but unfortunately I've already hit the 200 entry limit on Slashdot relationships thanks to your fellow morons and trolls.
I've gotten plenty of those cardboard advertisements for Verizon FIOS in the mail. They normally go in the trash. From my experience, the mom-and-pop DSL ISPs offer far better terms of service than the Internet service provided by Verizon FIOS. With my DSL provider I get a static subnet, and can host services without violating anything. If you want to use FIOS you basically give up that right, and are stuck with VZ as your ISP. Unless VZ has a FIOS-based internet service with a TOS comparable to my current ISP, I have absolutely no reason to switch. Internet access via DSL is quick enough for me, and, combined with satellite (DishNet) for TV, I get a relatively complete solution.
I called Verizon tech support for clarification about FIOS installation several months back. I was concerned that if the power went out, the phone would go dead in a few hours. (I don't have a backup generator or any plans to get one.) Verizon said all the phone lines in the house had to be switched over to fiber, so I declined to have it installed at that time, which was a shame because I had waited eagerly for several months till it became available in my area. I just called back 3 weeks ago, and their story had changed. Now, only the line getting FIOS has to be wwitched. So I guess I'll be getting fiber.
"If we cut the copper John we never have to worry about losing our job!"
Doubtable. More likely, it was "if we cut the copper, we can attach it to the fiber and use it to pull the new links through." It falls pretty well within the old adage of not attributing to malicious intent what can be explained by simple laziness.
Meanwhile, those of us who want both a choice of ISP (with decent TOS), and at the same time have the benefits of fiber to the home, are basically screwed. Of course, if they really don't disconnect the copper as a matter of policy, then there should be no reason you couldn't still have a DSL connection with your shiny happy ISP, and run services there, but at the same time use the FIOS connection to do all your pr0n downloadin'.
....Covad DSL and Cavalier for both Phone and DSL, I can truthfully say that Verizon is doing folks a favor.
I know this is not the point, but there it is.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It's Verizon's copper. They can do anything they damn well please with the stuff. They're not "preventing" competitors from competing -- said competitors can always make the same capital investment Verizon (or rather its predecessor telcos) did and lay copper down the street.
No, a competitor can't simply lay down more copper. In most places the incumbent has exclusive access to use the Right of Way for a given purpose. In the case of the telcos, only the incumbent has the right to have telephone landlines lain down. Even if you had a billion dollars and could afford to put in cables or fiber the only way you would be allowed to is if you buy off the politicians.
FalconShould there be a Law?
My fiber comes in on the opposite side of my property than my copper, and the Verizon tech didn't even walk to that side of the house. I still have copper into the house. Heck, there might even be an active POTS jack left...I have a habit of removing them when I remodel rooms. The only cable cut here is the cable, and that was by me getting a little to vigorous with a shovel while pulling a tree. I think the copper cut depends on your installer. That, and an 8 foot wide concrete slab.
--------- Never ask a geek why, unles you REALLY want to know.
It took me 3 weeks of fighting with Verizon (who insisted on taking 2 days to make a service appointment window, and insisted that they be 8a-7p) and my DSL provider (who was horribly frustrated by their inability to get Verizon to simply run a clean *bleeping* loop) to get things back up and running.
-Cheetah
Don't be too excited by Utopia. As a recent ex-resident of Murray, Utah I discovered that the only people who really get to participate are those in low density housing. Eg, a house or duplex, but not a triplex or apartment building with more than two units. Which is kind of funny since you get a disproportionate amount of sale tax from apartment dwellers per square foot of land.
That doesn't make sense. Higher densities reduce costs.
FalconShould there be a Law?
That's all right. Manhattan Island isn't served by FiOS either, except in new buildings.
Does anyone have suggestions for how to deal with Verizon or other phone companies who want to get rid of the copper? Any idea how to talk to them in such a way that they'll actually leave it alone and usable?
...
Note that just getting them to leave the copper from the pole to your house isn't necessarily enough. In other discussions of this, people have reported that the wires were left intact, but the copper wires were removed past the poles (probably after the last house on a block was converted to fibre). If you want to revert to copper for some reason, it won't do you much good if the copper stops at the pole and there's no connectivity to the POTS system.
So is there a way for a customer to force them to leave the POTS system intact and usable? Or can they legally just shut it down after the last house in a block has fibre?
At our house, we have a funny reverse situation: A few years ago, when we decided to get DSL over the phone line, they said they had to replace the wire to the house, and they did so. But the old wire is still there, dangling from the attachment point under the roof, and lying in a coil on the ground. I mentioned this to their CS people a couple of times, they said they'd do something about it, and nobody ever showed up. I checked, and my suspicion was correct: That useless wire is owned by Verizon, it's outside my house, and it's illegal for me to do anything with it. Not that it really matters, since it isn't electrified, but leaving old wires dangling and/or coiled on the ground somehow doesn't seem like a Best Practice
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
Fiber is paid for by the telcos, not the gov't so is not a tariffed service. While Verizon MUST lease copper to competitors, it isn't compelled to lease fiber access. Verizon cutting the copper is effectively cutting off any competition that was not a Baby Bell in a past life.
You may want to correct this statement. The government has and does subsidize fiber. The fiber-to-the-home project is funded through the Agriculture Department's Rural Utilities Service (RUS). Adam Golodner, deputy administrator of the RUS says: "We do encourage the development of technology that would bring broad band to the home at reasonable cost to meet the growing demand in rural areas by citizens who recognize perhaps more than citizens in urban areas that telecommunications shrinks time, distance, and space." As a percentage of funding of different broadband technologies as of September 2006 RUS (pdf) has spent "30% of approved and funded projects employed fiber-to-the-home technology, 24% employed DSL, 22% wireless (unlicensed), 19% hybrid fiber-coaxial (cable), 3% wireless (licensed), and 2% broadband over powerlines (BPL)."
"Savvy developer wins federal money to wire homelands"
By Kevin Dayton
Advertiser Capitol Bureau Chief
A local politically connected company is eligible for as much as $400 million in federal loans to weave fiber-optic cable through Hawaiian Home Lands on six islands, even though much of the land is undeveloped and lacks roads, water and electricity.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I'd be the first to recognize that the history of the telco industry is insanely complicated, but the solution is to find a way to divide things up that takes both the private and public investments in the infrastructure
Oh, I agree. As I said many tymes I think ownership of some infrastructure should be separate from the services that it provides. For instance I think it might be better for a community to build and own the infrastructure but allow open access for any services the infrastructure can provide. Take cable, a nonprofit, for profit, or the city owns the cable but then it allows different companies to offer cable tv, internet access, phone service, or a Triple Play with all three. I would be able to go to one company for tv, another for phone service, and a third for net access.
Should there be a Law?
It appears to be a type of glass threw connection over a single strand for hundreds of households. It is prone to dB loss and don't even think about pulling the specs for the splices and couplers that they are using. It is a great idea and a very telco like implementation.
Sounds like a PON (Passive Optical Network). If it's the one I saw at a tradeshow a couple years back it has:
- Curb to houses on one of the two common infrared frequencies.
- Houses to curb on the other.
- Optical splitters (like a cable network's coaxial splitters) to distribute the outgoing and collect the incoming light.
- The protocol is essentially ethernet, with an inbound scheduling add-on, and the chip is a hardcoded for 256 MAC addresses (which allows for, I think, a max of 254 drops).
I fully understand running more than one user on a single strand of fiber however they are running hundreds with high db loss and compensating with repeaters. I guess if I was going to do it I would have simply ran a larger bundle of fibers to a neighborhood and broke it apart there.
Even if you were close enough to the CO that you didn't need a repeater (which probably means using more expensive single-mode fiber - which in turn would mean using it everywhere due to inventory issues) you'd still need two transceivers per customer, along with a transceiver slot in a line card in a VERY expensive box in VERY expensive rack space.
With a PON you need one transceiver per subscriber, plus three per neighborhood of up to 250 or so subscribers. (Optical splitters are basically a funny splice to fibers, done in a factory, so they're a heck of a lot cheaper than transceivers and active logic to route or switch packets between them.) You also only need one transceiver and the associated panel area at the CO for a neighborhood (or one for many "250ish customer neighborhoods" if there's other routing hardware at the local box where the "neighborhood" headend(s) lives.) And the distances are small enough that cheaper multimode fibers and short-range transceivers are just fine.
Signal strength losses aren't an issue. This is a digital signal, so as long as the strength is adequate for detection it's error free despite a lot of loss. A set of ideal balanced splitters doing a 1->256 split is only about 24db attenuation and real ones aren't that much worse. Drop in the bucket.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
I had fios installed 2 months ago in Richmond, VA. I read the original article on slashdot, and asked the fios tech about cutting the copper. He said they didn't do that because there was a 30 day cancel policy and it would be to expensive to come back out. I still have a copper phone line, and fios at the same time. It causes issues for my billing though because they are "mixed media" and I don't get a bundle package.
I was not aware of the unfolding fiber optic monopoly situation, though. This does not bode well for our economic situation in general, nor our 1st amendment. With all television signals going digital in 2008, and Verizon service contracts stipulating that they can "terminate or suspend your services", that pretty much constitutes an information chokehold. And for a limited time, you can get all your services bundled for $30 a month! That means they have you phone, your tv, and your internet.
This is effectively exchanging your bill of rights for "terms of service". But, I guess that's where we were going, anyways, right? Exchanging liberty for security?"Ride the Light"
"I do not avoid women, Mandrake . . . but I do deny them my essence." - Gen. Ripper
As far as dark fiber, I'm not aware of the government subsidizing that, the ILECs put that in, they shouldn't be forced sell it just because they aren't using it. Hmm.. If they stopped maintaining the copper, then they are failing to pay the right of way fees (that is part of the line maintenance costs). Thus the wire would be confiscated by the local government. I suppose legally the local government could maintain the lines and and sell the loops to the CLECs (in fact would be obligated to if they maintained the lines), or could tear the lines down, (and probably sue the ILEC's for the cost).
however your claim that FIOS users have no need for CLECs is absurd. The CLECs exist so that there is a least some level of competition.
Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
Wrong -- almost nowhere is there an exclusive right to use the right of way. In fact, generally by definition the right of way is open to anyone. Beyond rights of way, there are usually also dedicated utility easements which are generally granted to "any firm or corporation, public or private, who provides telephone, telegraph, internet or other communications services" or some similar language
-- "Big Brother is Watching..."
Three months later, grandma passs away and you call Covad.
Have gnu, will travel.
I was one of the first people to have FIOS, being in the 3rd city in the US that was wired (Huntington Beach). I've had it for almost two years now, and I got the same line from them about how they "had" to cut the copper when they put in the fiber. This guy is lying through his teeth.
Build their own infrastructure - not likely when you look at the basic elements. Most telco service lines share poles with electric lines and in some areas cable. There is minimum spacing required between the various services and the electric company's dictate rules. So you can't just hang another set of wires, not enough ground clearance. I can't even get cable service because the poles on my property are too short. Nothing is simple. In my rural area, ATT says if I'm getting 19.2 (yes, nineteen dot two) dial up service, they are satisfying their service standard. I'd like to know where those billions of dollars are going to provide service to rural areas.
Looking at Speakeasy's prices, I'm surprised they still exist, unless my area costs more than most...
Couldn't be further from the truth... I and a few others I know, have had our FIOS installed and still have the copper line attached... they didn't touch it or ask to touch it. I wouldn't have minded a bit, I'll NEVER go back to DSL it's crap compared to FIOS!
Wait, paid for by telcos, or laid without having been granted a monopoly? In the latter case, I don't see why cable cos can't do the same and eat their lunch.
Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
Yes, it might prevent someone from reconnecting them, because reconnecting is more expensive and time-consuming than disabling (depending on how it was "disabled").
The issue here is about encouraging and supporting competition in a market that is easily monopolizable. Verizon should not have a "right" to disable the copper... they are only the carrier. They did not lay the copper in the first place. That was another company, at another time, operating with government subsidies.
You're in luck. With Verizon you don't have to choose.
Don't underestimate the power of The Source
When I got my FIOS installed late last year they asked me if I wanted to move my phone from copper to fiber. I said 'no' and they said 'ok'. Maybe they are doing this in some or many cases, but it certainly isn't a formal policy because they haven't done it to anyone on my street. Yes, my evidence is anecdotal, but so is this story.
Ummm... they are already doing it in Maine
I live in southern maine, I had fios installed, yes, they disconnected my copper wires from the house. Do I care? Not really, if they raise rates too high I will just use cable or cellular for phone/net
Kittery, Kittery Point, York, Eliot have Verizon FIOS.
When I had fiber installed, I had to ask the installers on two occasions to get it removed. At the initial installation of internet and phone service, the installer said he couldn't remove it since it wasn't part of the job order. On the second visit a few weeks later when the television service was added I had to almost beg them to take down the copper. My motives were not so much against having the copper as they were to unclutter the wires running to the front of my house.
Now power and phone come to one spot. I'm happy.
But getting back on topic: What could covad offer on copper that competes with fiber access? Nothing. Is someone going to start offering 100Mbps net access over the legacy copper? Not bloody likely, mate. That copper is dead and ready for recycling. I've even taken down the cable that comcast ran to my house. Comcast's internet services sucks.
Should Verizon allow competitors access to their fiber network? Sure, but charge them an arm and a leg.
With copper at an all time high, and the wires made of copper, it would not surprise me if the techs are doing that so they can sell the wire to a recyclers.
Remember, each penny is worth about $.05 as metal, most of that being the copper shell.
Sure, it is unethical and possibly illegal, but I am surprised that submitter didn't think of that, considering the number of unethical geeks on Slashdot.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
Personally, I am happy with the Fios service I've been getting thus far. Unlike all the other services I've had -- including cable modem -- it has been 100% reliable, including the data rates (which I constantly test with BitTorrent! :-) By any definition of the word, Fios 9000 is foolproof and incapable of error. :-) :-) :-)
Considering my past very negative experiences with Verizon, I am extremely pleased to say they seem to have "gotten it right" this time. And if they do screw up in the future, there's always cable and satellite. More expensive and more annoying, but those are my fallbacks. But so far Fios has been -- for me -- the lowest cost, most reliable, and by far the fastest Internet connection service I've ever had. Bar none.
I still think other offers of Verizon sucks, though. No one -- and definitely no company -- is perfect.
Ruby Neural Evolution of Augmenting Topologies
For what it's worth, when I had FIOS installed a few months ago the tech simply disconnected the copper from the box and ran new copper from the ONT. No ripping, no silicone.
"Talk to any person who got FIOS in Florida and you'll see they cut the cable."
I live in Florida and no they didn't.
I only go to buffets for the unlimited soft serve.
My water and sewer system, and the system in all the places I've lived, work pretty darned well. I'd be happy with management like that.
Then you don't follow water and sewer politics very closely. It may work, but nowhere near any kind of efficiency and there's always someone gaming the system. You and I generally accept/ignore the inefficiency.
Research William Mulholland and the cronies that kept him in power. It's probably the most well documented case of water politics.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
A few FIOS people in my office have their POTS but that's because they told Verizon they have alarm systems that use POTS to call the police. By law, this line cannot be cut.
Mod +5 funny
It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
Much of the home security systems (ADT, Slomin etc) use the copper cable for alerts - thanks to an age old dual line capability in the copper lines. Would this disconnection terminate the copper connection for the security company too?
Its ridiculous to say that the copper needs to be cut to facilitate the moving of the POTS line to FIOS
They port the number - its all done in the PSTN vapor
That's just some lameass line of bullcrap the feed to the clueless consumer
---- "Logoff! That cookie shit makes me nervous!" - A. Soprano
This kind of thing goes on in the telephony business all the time, even if it is never an official policy.
Example: I had Comcast cable for net access, and Dish Network for the comedy channel (heheh). I discovered that if I got basic cable tv service, Comcast would automatically upgrade my internet speed to the highest possible. Cost of basic cable? $15/month. Discount with existing internet service? $10/mo. Cost to get much faster porn downloads, um, internet access? $5/month.
So, I ordered basic cable, the installer showed up, and while I wasnt looking, unplugged my satellite cable, and ran the analog cable tv signal over those wires. I said, uh, what are you doing? Putting in your service, sir. Yeah, well, there's nothing in your order about disrupting other services. Drill a hole, dammit!
The guy knew exactly what he was doing. After I got all that sorted out, I unplugged my basic cable (dont use it), called and complained to the office about the guy's conduct, and they removed the install fee from my bill. Bastards.
I got rid of my copper 4 years ago, along with Verison
All I have is my cell. I actually took the interface off my house and
handed it to a tech a few weeks ago. He thought I was nuts.
I told him I did not need it and it was in the way.
No I don't need copper, and I am regular enough to not need fiber...
-- I am the NRA, enough said...
I believe Mr Taukie thinks he is telling the truth as my years at Verizon showed me if nothing else, it is a communications company that can't communicate. Ask anyone who has worked for Verizon more than a month and they will agree with you. There is even documentation, which I am sure is being hastily deleted from servers as we speak, that states to remove the copper drop to the customer premesis before leaving the jobsite. That being said if the customer doesn't want it done, they won't do it and in some cases it never gets done anyway. If you want to know how a war is going, u never ask the Generals (Directors, VP's) because they will always say the war is going well and according to schedule, you ask the soldiers.
Whatever insight your post had, I reverted to zero upon reading you call it a "Triple Play" with a straight face.
Why? What's wrong with "Triple Play"? I first heard it in I believe an article in IEEE's "Spectrum" a few years back. Lately around here ComCast has been advertising it's Triple Play services.
Now I'm not advocating it, I only stated if an entity wanted to offer it in Utopia Utah they could. As for me, I don't have it and I doubt I ever will. While my cable and net access is provided by ComCast, my ISP is Earthlink. Also I don't have landline phone service, the only phone I have is a cell phone, and it's cheaper.
FalconShould there be a Law?
So I have a question about the complain of removing copper. Previously, people have argued that the infrastructure in the US are so old (mostly copper), that it'd take a fortune to replace them with fiber. Other country don't have this headache because ironically, they weren't technically advanced than us before, so they didn't have all these copper they have to dig up. So people on /. are complaining how we are falling behind in broadband connectivity.
Fair enough. But if fiber is the future. And suppose digging up and selling the copper can offset the some of the cost for a company to lay the fiber...is it really fair to complain about a temporary lost of service (assuming of course that once the fibers are lays, you can get digital phone/tv//internet). There is the issue of monopoly for the company that lays the fiber, but that's another problem. Did I completely misunderstand the issue here??
The only possible interpretation of any research whatever in the 'social sciences' is: some do, some don't