Slashdot Mirror
Argentine Government Orders Major ISP To Close
Doctor Jonas writes "Argentine ISP Fibertel has been barred from continuing operations because of the dissolution of their status as a company after they were absorbed by Cablevisión of Argentina, now part of media conglomerate Grupo Clarín. The Minister of Planning, Julio de Vido, announced the measure, and said it was Grupo Clarín's own doing by having shut down the Fibertel company and turning it into a commercial brand, and that ISP licenses are not transferable after acquisitions from one company to the other. The Argentine opposition said the move was another attack on Grupo Clarín's standing and another part of the feud between them and President Cristina Fernández and her husband, former president Nestor Kirchner. Cablevisión has promised to go to the courts to overturn the decision, and the opposition seeks to protect Fibertel's continuing operations through a bill in Congress. More than a million households and businesses would need to change ISPs in merely 90 days, possibly strengthening the internet provisioning dominance of both Telefónica (subsidiary of the Spanish Telefonica) and Telecom."
They engage in politics. This is an exciting development.
Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
Can anybody or the editors explain the relevance to "my rights online" of this story,
Politics can have effects on all of us, even if we don't care about politics.
"Trust me - I know what I'm doing."
- Sledge Hammer
There are slashdot readers in most of the world. And yes, the world IS not the usa. And by the way, just so you know, telefónica IS part of the third largest financial group in the world. Welcome to earth, usaian
NO SIG
I'm one of the affected million and I will have to change ISPs. Fibertel used to throttle youtube all the time, but apart from that the service was good, if a little expensive. They are part of a huge news-controlling monopoly, broke the law, and they got what they deserve. There are many choices of broadband internet over here, so I basically don't give a sh*t.
The URL is not Fibertel.com. Is fibertel.com.ar
It's informative, I am out of mod points. Please mod up.
Not the same thing.
For Brazilians hot women are an essential part of their national identity. There's a reason why Brazil is famous for the women at the carnival in Rio.
There are many choices of broadband internet over here, so I basically don't give a sh*t.
Good for the people affected.
But it still doesn't seem like a smart move to piss off more than a million voters just to fuel a feud between two politicians.
"More than a million households and businesses would need to change ISPs in merely 90 days"
Technically, yes. In reality, not quite. Since Grupo Clarin will sue for its rights, the shut down of the company won't happen until all the trials are finished. Since justice takes a long time in Argentina, it will be some months before the users have to switch ISPs, and there is the chance that the trials carry on way past october 2011, when the next president is elected, so the decision may be overturned before it actually takes effect.
Still, there is a lot of misinformation on this story around here, so some people still believe the company is already shutting down, which is draining their customer base. Also, until the justice rules on the case, Fibertel won't be able to sell its service to new customers, to the advantage of other ISPs.
I myself have been using Fibertel for the past 5 years and had no complaint so far. Still, they do belong to Grupo Clarin, which is a huge monopoly around here, so the decision is not all that ilogical.
in north america, cablevision are the victimizers
but in south america, cablevisión are the victimized
it has to do with everything in reverse in the antipodes: summer is winter, night is day, good is bad, and i believe gravity works in reverse down there
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I totally agree. In this case the government just applied the law. It is questioned because the measure happened to be against a big group (they own a lot of media; TV, newspapers, radios...) which is opposed to the actual government. But that ISP was providing its services without a license totally aware of it. So in this case justice was served.
Well, I'm not from Argentina and the news are interesting to me.
If you're not interested, just jump to the next news. No need to be an ass.
South Americans have broadband? They're probably not even circumcised. Savages.
I blacklisted Argentina long time ago. That country is full of wallhacks.
In Soviet Russia, Major ISP closes YOU!
So, what's the deal with the 1st lady (do you call them that there?) becoming president?
I thought the various kennedies and then Bush and Bush Jr were bad enough, but a husband and wife switching off as president? Do you have term limits? Because it sounds like a really transparent way to get around a presidential term limit.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
You do remember that Hillary Clinton was running for President, eh? I doubt I know much more about Argentinian politics than you, and I don't disagree about the idea of getting fresh heads in office, but your comment is a tad sexist there.
This is part of the intention by the government to stop the merger of the two biggest cable providers. The merger has already been done, despite it being rejected ( http://www.buenosairesherald.com/BreakingNews/View/10918 ). The new merged company dissolved one of the parts, without getting the license to operate under the new company. So, now they are operating under a license belonging to a company which no longer exists.
The issue here is government vs media giants. Antimonopoly measures, which are common in developed countries, have a lot more opposition in non-developed countries, where economic interests go over the people's interest (yes, more than in the US =) ).
This is the second time in the comments to this story I've seen Grupo Clarin referred to as a "monopoly". What's the market that they effectively own?
Well - it doesn't say "Your rights online IN AMERICA", does it? It looks to me that some country is diddling around with their citizens rights to get online with the company of their choice. Rights. Online. OK, maybe it has little to do with YOUR rights, but then, who the hell are YOU?
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
They were by far the most restrictive ISP: See http://wiki.vuze.com/w/Bad_ISPs#Argentina
Somewhere in the 20th century.
Grupo Clarín owns the national major newspaper, and seems to control the 2nd major one. It owns TV channels in every town and city, and in many cities is the only cable operator. It controls the only newspaper paper plant in Argentina and uses prices to undermine other newspapers.
As I explained in another comment, this is really about the government trying to stop a new merger, because Clarin had acquired the 2nd largest cable company in Argentina. The govt rejected the merger, but Clarín went ahead and dissolved the company, creating for itself an illegal situation (because the ISP license belonged to the old comany, which is now dissolved).
We are here in very interesting times regarding the role of journalism, and the fight agains media giants...
This is the difference between capitalism and socialism. In the U.S., the company would have just been fined every year that they didn't get a license. The company would eventually get a clue and start paying the lower fee over the larger fine, and operate legally. However, in Argentina, they just dissolve your company and screw all your customers. They screwed themselves out of all that tax money, fines, fees, and so on as well. It's a pretty poor move, and this is why companies prefer to do business with the United States.
So, you are saying it has nothing to do with the ex-president Nestor personal vendetta against grupo Clarin? Isn't it weird that it was former president Nestor itself who approved Clarin purchase of Fibertel, and that now that he no longer likes Clarin his wife is doing this? Kirchner's presidencies have been 2 of the most corrupted and terrible governments we have had. So sad.
You're probably not old enough to remember, but Lurleen Wallace was elected to replace her husband as Governor of Alabama in 1967 (Only one term per person there.) with the campaign slogan of "Let George do it."
Good, inexpensive web hosting
Weird how this same government approved the merger they are trying to stop now. Yes, it was former president Nestor Kirchner the one who approved the merger. Now, somehow Cristina Kirchner, the ex president wife suddenly realizes is a bad merge. Strange, isn't it?
I used to have Fibertel. It was complete shit. Even worse than Comcast is in the USA. They have bad, spotty and throttled service in some areas, but they are the only cablemodem provider in Argentina.
Nonetheless, this is yet another move in the continuing struggle between the current government and grupo Clarín. (http://www.argentinepost.com/2009/09/with-help-from-clarin-kirchner-rises-from-the-ashes.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/13/kirchner-and-clarin-argen_n_285105.html)
Even when I don't particularly like neither Fibertel as a company nor the Clarín media conglomerate, I really despise the current government/mafia. They have close ties to Chávez, and the only reason we are not to become Venezuela is because this country still has a Middle Class, despite this people attempts to destroy it.
Don't confuse yourself, this people aren't nice guys that just realised that a private company were doing something illegal. They are pushing an agenda, they don't give two shits about legality as long as they are getting their millionaire bribes.
For Spanish speaking people, this is the people currently in our government: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRaDHhJAvGQ http://www.lanacion.com.ar/nota.asp?nota_id=1296271
[quote]You do remember that Hillary Clinton was running for President, eh?[/quote]
I don't like dynasties so I would have had a similar problem with her.
but your comment is a tad sexist there.
What? Because my US examples of the kennedies and the bushes were all men? Because the current Argentinian president is female? Just how is gender even an issue?
Just because it doesn't have any effect on you doesn't mean it doesn't affect anyone, say, in Argentina. Although most /. readers may be anti-corporate, the idea that a government can just hand-wave and shutdown a major ISP is somewhat unsettling. Even though this doesn't affect me personally, I would still consider this a "rights" issue - as in the right to choose one's ISP, without the government interfering and saying who can and who can't be an ISP.
AccountKiller
That there are many choices of broadband is a blatant lie. Clarin Group should be forced to sell Fibertel to other company (not to the big 2 telcos) and that's all.
So, allow me to provide a little bit more information on this subject.
Our current government has that schizophrenic touch that Bush had. Their policy is the same that Bush had: Helping their corporate friends, pushing an agenda.
Clarin is the largest spanish newspaper in the world. That includes all of Latin America + Spain. The Clarin Group, the holding behind the newspaper, also owns several other newspapers, several TV channels, publishing companies, and a lot of other companies in media and communications. It's one of the largest companies in South America, and it has huge worldwide influences.
They have been in a fight for market penetration and control of the media with Telefonica for 2 decades. Our former President Nestor Kirchner, Secretary General of the Union of South American Nations and husband of our current president, had overwhelming support from Clarin, they actually helped him to achieve the presidency. Later, their relationships got a lot more tense when Nestor Kirchner did a few deals with Telefonica. Eventually, Clarin had withdrawn thoverhwellmingeir support, and had became his number one public enemy.
Now, Nestor's wife (Cristina) is our president. Just like him, she's a fucking cunt, with a lot of personal interests that she has no moral issues pushing all the time, and a lot of friends to help out. Just like bush, they had interests in Oil companies, and in several big industries, and also in real estate. Pushing their own business is their only interest.
So, this is just a move to pressure the Clarin group. This is a way to silence the bad publicity they've been getting from Clarin lately. It's a douchebag move.
The worst thing about this is, Fibertel was owned by Cablevision. Later, with the approval of Nestor Kirchner, Clarin, through one of their subsidiaries (Multicanal: The Argentinian Comcast) bought Cablevision and therefore Fibertel. Now the government claims that data transmission licenses are nontransferable, and that therefore Fibertel is operating illegally. Also, Clarin owns almost 300 different licenses from several companies they have acquired throughout the years. That is highly irregular, and the government is using that as an excuse too.
The worst thing here is that there are not many alternatives in here where it comes to Internet access.
In Buenos Aires (Argentina's Capital City) and nearby cities (Metropolitan Area) there are several providers, such as iplan, fibertel, telefonica, telecom, telmex, telecentro, and others. In the rest of the country, the options are much more limited. There is surely one DSL provider (Either Telefonica's Speedy or Telecom's Arnet, and in most places there is also a cablemodem provider (Fibertel), a Wimax provider (Telmex), and some small local services, usually cooperatives or small wireless companies. And that's all. Telefonica sucks big time, both technically and commercially, and Fibertel is the only decent alternative, both technically and economically.
You can get a decent 3MB cablemodem from Fibertel for ~40 dollars (160 pesos).
Of course, Fibertel is not going to die. They are either going to appeal and win (or at least delay this for years to come), or sell the whole infrastructure to someone. Anyway, this is just the government reminding us that it can fuck with us whenever it wants.
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Argentina's government is becoming Venezuela.
Earth... is that some new state we annexed?
Sir, given the current state of international politics, you truly honour your nickname, don't you ?
--- There is no spoon
I'm argentinian too, (and I'm affected) and let me fill up fellow slashdotters a little more on this. Grupo Clarin is a _huge_ media monopoly and the second largest company in the country. They own pretty much everything, every of the most relevant newspaper, cable TV company, Air TV signal, radio, broadband, media producers, etc. Until recently they have also all the monopoly on broadcasting all soccer games (soccer is big here). They slowly acquired monopoly status thanks to laws passed during dictatorship times (which they favored).
Grupo Clarin's reach is so large that they control most of the public thinking, and many times helped coups or to overthrow presidents that didn't get along well with them. They used to be in a good relationship with the current government until a few years ago, when something mysterious happened and they became enemies (it's not certain what happened, but most likely that the government blocked them access to entering them into telephony, by favoring other companies, so they couldn't expand their monopoly). As a result, every single day the largest newspapers, TV channels, etc attack the government in any way they can, fabricating negative scenarios, taking government claims out of context, etc, reducing significantly the positive image of the president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner.
The government, in exchange, started passing several anti-monopoly laws to break Grupo Clarin, revoking their licenses, taking their grants for soccer broadcasting away, as well as prosecuting them for the crimes they committed during dictatorship.
As a personal view, I feel my fellow argentinians are too blinded by the two-way hate, and too worried about taking sides, that don't realize this mutual destruction between the media monopoly and the current government (one of the most corrupt governments in our history) is probably very beneficial for the country, as it's like killing two birds with one stone..
It isn't wierd, it's strategic. Goverment in this country is getting almost childish in some aspects.
Regardin ISP offerings, it's really all the same crap all over the place. Some have Fibertel and works like a charm, other with the same ISP is utter-bullshit (mainly for those who live on "microcentro"). The same happens with other ISPs. And what about the costs? Everything about technology is expensive... 120 AR$ for a ADSL 3MB service isn't precisely cheap...
A bit of extra info from another argentinian. Don't expect to be enlightened though, since the situation is basically a gigantic clusterfuck with no easily discernible good or bad guys.
Grupo Clarín is Argentina's largest media conglomerate. It doesn't have a monopoly in anything because there is lots of competition, but it is the 500-pound gorilla in all the areas it competes in and in most of the markets it invests in. The largest newspaper (Clarín), one of the biggest tv networks, one of the largest cable networks, one of the largest cable ISPs (the one mentioned in the summary), the largest newspaper printer, etc. Whatever media-related thing you can name, they have some stake on it.
Grupo Clarín is also politically opposed the the current administration, the Kirchners (current president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner and former president Nestor Kirchner), and the feeling is mutual. The battle between them has been raging for a few years, but in the past few 10 or so months things have become wild (I'd talk about sending the police to strip-search the sons of the owner of Grupo Clarin, but that would really make this go off-topic).
Last year a new law governing media and communications was passed on the last few days before the Kirchner's lost the majoritary control of Congress. The law made sweeping changes to the process of getting a license for broadcasting, ostensibly to avoid monopolies, but in practice setting things up so that the Government alone chooses who gets a license and who doesn't. Given the size of Grupo Clarin, some of the new license limits would mean it would have to forcibly drop many markets, or split itself to satisfy the new requirements. Moreover, given its enmity with the current administration, it's obvious Clarin would be hard-pressed to get more licenses in the future. The law has a lot of good points, but this much is evident to everybody, though whether you interpret it as good (since it would weaken some businesses large enough to be close to monopolies) or bad (since the government gets to choose who has a voice and who doesn't) varies.
That the government is ordering this Grupo Clarin owned ISP to close is just the latest spat in this long fight. One one side you have the government's arguments: that the license has caducated, and so they are merely enforcing the law, and that Grupo Clarin is a big bad monopoly anyways. On the other side, there's the fact that the ISP has been operating under this license for about six years and that the issue only comes up now, after the current government modified the laws, arguably as part of an ongoing battle against the very people they are now attacking with them.
On the technical side, there's the issue of what to do with the many users of this [very large] ISP. The other large ISPs can't possibly take this many new users in a year, much less in a 90-days timeframe. Moreover, this is a country-wide ISP; there are places where there simply isn't another choice (which many users have already pointed out).
To make things more interesting, there's the fact that the other large ISPs are the duopolic companies mentioned in the summary. They offer telephone and internet services, but not cable, and cable companies can also offer internet services, but no telephone, as the so-called triple play is not allowed here (so much for wanting to fight monopolies, I guess). The telephone companies inherited the state's phone lines. They will be the big winners in this whole thing, and it seems they have ties to the Kirchners as well.
I try to be neutral in giving you this info, but I guess you can see I tend to lean on the side of Grupo Clarin at least on this one. I'm less afraid of a big bad conglomerate whose products I can stop buying if I want, than of a government who can decide whether or not I should be allowed to hear what someone wants to say.
Well - it doesn't say "Your rights online IN AMERICA", does it? It looks to me that some country is diddling around with their citizens rights to get online with the company of their choice. Rights. Online. OK, maybe it has little to do with YOUR rights, but then, who the hell are YOU?
Well depending where in the world you went to school. Argentina is in America or is one of the Americas.
For the rest of us who didn't grow up in the US, we were taught in school that America is ONE continent, which is separated in North, Central and South America. Only you in your little bubble think that America is a country. Fuck you sir.
As a chilean, is sad to see how our neighbours are having bad times with their government. They used to pick on us chileans to make themselves look good, now they don't even do that! (joking, joking). I hope you guys get your shit together and make a revolution or something. Argentines are known for their personality, use it!
You may want to take a look at wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cristina_Fern%C3%A1ndez_de_Kirchner "She won with 45.3% of the vote, a 22% lead over her nearest rival. This was the widest margin obtained by a candidate since civil rule was reinstalled in 1983, and avoided the need for a runoff election." "In 1995, Fernández was elected to represent Santa Cruz in the Senate. She was elected to the Chamber of Deputies in 1997, and in 2001, returned to the Senate." And I must say in Argentina there is a two-term limit, but it was his husband's first term when she got elected. Last year the congress passed a bill changing the law ruling communications. The old law was there since the last dictatorship and among other things prohibited NGO to own a media, even a small radio station. Now the big media conglomerates are criticising every action the government takes because their well-protected monopolies are going to disappear (they'll have to un-invest in all the companies they absorved just to avoid different editorial lines). Grupo Clarin (Clarin Group) is the biggest of these conglomerates and states this is an attack to them, but the reality is that they were operating an ISP illegaly without a license and the measure taken by the government was executed according to law.
T!
Yes, weird. Still, it's better for the people what they are doing now, not what they did before. The Multicanal-Cablevision merger is (was?) obviously a disaster for us consumers.
He's just playing a character: the ignorant American. I'm from a country south of the border and I'm not the least bit offended by him. I actually thought it was funny. Lighten up!
Come on!. There isn't a single spot in Argentina where Fibertel is the only ISP. Telecom and Telefonica are forced to bring service anywhere it is requested, because phone lines in Argentina are considered by law a Public Service. Cablevisión only brings cable where it will be profitable, and only some areas. I live in Córdoba, the second largest city of Argentina and my house is located 35 blocks away from downtown (Barrio Alto Alberdi, para los que conocen). I live 4 blocks from Cablevisión's technical headquarter and I don't have digital cable nor cablemodem coverage. Wherever Fibertel is, there was Telecom or Telefonica before.
T!
It looks he was playing the average usamerican.
There is a similar thing in Afganistan - the US set things up to favor women running for office, as a means to correct the extreme gender inequality of the country. It didn't take long for an exploit to be found: Women officially run, but on the openly known grounds that they are to defer to their husband in all matters and have their name on the ballot only for legal reasons.
They have bought media companies all around the country. They bought tv stations in every major city and shut down local programming. They produce everything in Buenos Aires and it's seen in the whole country. It won't boe a problem if there were local alternatives, but since Clarin bought them... The same goes with newspapers and radio station. Now, they owned a cable company named Multicanal. The only competence was Cablevision, but they have divided coverage areas so they don't overlap, so there was no real competence. They provided cablemodem service over Multicanal, but it was really shitty and nobody used it. What they did is buy stakes from foreign holders of Cablevision so they could control both cable companies, and now they have done a customer reacomodation, meaning that you had multicanal and now you have cablevision and multicanal has no customers. Fibertel (The ISP) was a company owned by the same owners of Cablevision. Fibertel was licensed to provide cablemodem, but Cablevision was denied, so the trick was Fibertel owning the cable wires and providing internet access, and Cablevision "renting" fibertel's network and providing cable signal. If you had the two services, you had to pay two bills separately. On Jan 15 Grupo Clarin made Cablevision absorb Fibertel, dissolving Fibertel's legal personality, but intended to use the license granted to Fibertel. In Argentine law, in a regulated communications market, these licences are not transferibles, so that was not approved by the government and were told to stop subscribing new customers. They didn't stop, and tryed to keep operating illegaly.
T!
mmm...I was a bit lazy in how emphasize the "tad" part of that.
BUT to answer your question, the comment was a bit sexist because you do not seem to know anything about Argentine politics. Yet it reads (as in, don't know what you actually intended) that there is the assumption that the original president / husband is the main player in the dynasty. As opposed to the new president / wife being the one to skirt term limit by being a puppet master for the first term.
You may disagree, and I understand there are many meanings that could be read from that. This is a really boring comment, sorry!
hah, that's horrible.
This is why we need same-sex marriage in the united states. WHO KNOWS HOW MANY SECRET GAY LOVERS ARE SWAPPING SEATS, SKIRTING TERM LIMITS WITH A MASTER PUPPETEER CONTROLLING FROM BEHIND!
And don't get me started on the polyamory. If they don't have legal rights, how will we know!?! AN ARMY OF COMPLICATED LOVERS TREATING THE GOVERNOR'S SEAT LIKE AN ORGY SEAT OF THE MONTH, WITH THE MAIN MAN IN CHARGE FOR DECADES.
The Minister of Planning
The very thought of that sends chills down libertarian spines and thrills up progressives' legs.
It's about "rights" because one of the corporations involved, Grupo Clarín, is a media company that has an editorial policy that opposes the current government of Argentina.
It's not a business decision, it's a political decision, and a frightening one.
The debate over whether or not they broke law is misleading, because they broke a law that requires you to get permission from the government to provide internet access. Why would I have to do that? I don't want my government to get involved with me and my internet provider. What good have they done with that "power" anyway? (other than force them to shut down apparently). The "license to provide internet" shouldn't have to exist, so far it's only been a tool for the government to control them for their own benefit.
--
Stay tuned for some shock and awe coming right up after this messages!
As a result, every single day the largest newspapers, TV channels, etc attack the government in any way they can, fabricating negative scenarios, taking government claims out of context, etc, reducing significantly the positive image of the president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner.
Sounds like Grupo Clarin is sort of the Fox News of Argentina (to put it in terms that will inflame slashdotters.)
Wooosh... (And same for the mods who modded GP troll).
Good luck with getting a new provider during the following 3 months.
Delays are bad enough when they _don't_ have 1000000 people to absorb.
Progressive != Socialist (though they do often coincide as well as having similar goals in certain areas). Progressivism is the pursuit of social and legal reform, progress if you will, with the aim of making our society a fairer easier place to live for all involved. Socialism is partial or total government control over certain industries and redistribution of wealth, the idea being that in some areas the free market will produce sub-optimal solutions (basically any area where your ideal outcome isn't necessarily maximum profit, where companies could/would take advantage of private citizens or where people would suffer unduly without government aid). While socialists and progressives can be one and the same its quite possible to support one ideology without supporting the other (this usually comes up with groups like Christian-Socialists who's religious background simultaneously compels them to render aid unto the needy and be socially conservative or in the opposite case of non-socialist progressive in certain strains of libertarian (ironic, given the post I'm replying to) who support progressive social reform (though obviously not of the legally enforced variety, that running counter to libertarianism) .).
Note: I'm in favor of a lot of both socialist and progressive policies, and while I disagree with most core libertarian principles and find most self identified 'libertarians' (read: rebadged conservatives) to be annoying and insincere there are a number of libertarian positions that I agree with so, in short, my above statement was not a value judgment, merely a factual correction.
PS And yes fellow AC, I realize that you're trolling, but many make such statements in all seriousness so I felt the need to correct.
PPS IN the spirit of posting AC, CHOKE ON A DICK DONKEYFUCKER
Taco Bell special, bah. According to what I've heard about american operators it's probably capped, slow and costly.
As a result, every single day the largest newspapers, TV channels, etc attack the government in any way they can, fabricating negative scenarios, taking government claims out of context, etc, reducing significantly the positive image of the president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner.
Lol party line.
You need a license to drive, a license to own a restaurant, and a license to do pretty much anything else in most any civilized country. Don't pretend now that requiring a license to provide internet is an unsurmountable requirement. Cablevision shot itself in the foot. It was cheap to keep Fibertel open, but they couldn't to that, because they are way too cheap. And I've been an employee on the other ISP of the group, so I know how really really cheap and clueless they are. On top of that, add the packet shaping, throttling, and spying your traffic (for legal reasons, mostly)
I'm Argentine living overseas, and Fibertel was always awful. The lie, cheat and deliver shitty, throttled connections. In any other country they would have been sued out of existence by now.
Not to mention their awful eyesore coaxial network, made on top of crappy poles - did you know all that stuff is illegal and has been illegal since they started?
Every time they had a problem they blamed "microcortes" (microcuts) as if that existed at all.
Microbullshit. May they rot in hell.
and has a lot of "friends in high places" in Latin America if you know what I mean "nudge nudge", "wink wink"
I'd say Socialists are a proper subset of Progressives.
Progressives tend to be not just in favor of progress towards a better world, but in favor of government policies that will make a world they consider better.
There are two ways to give the government power to enact such policies: government ownership (Socialism) and government regulation. Socialism has a bad rap these days, so people who seek to make the government stronger tend to work for more regulation, such as the recent healthcare reform.
However, the difference is cosmetic. If the government decides what will be offered and at what price, it would not matter if the company officially has shareholders and calls itself private.
-- Support a free market in the field of government
Hold it a second, you have to have a license to provide Internet access to people? And you are OK with that? You are OK with the government deciding who can and cannot be an ISP?
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
That's basically the role of the intellectual left in Latin America.
Requiring a license to provide internet is a barrier to the freedom of expression, a natural and fundamental right, and is intrinsically different than requiring a license to drive or to provide food.
As a fellow South American, it's really sad to see the current state of Argentina. I thought about setting up a branch office in Buenos Aires due to a cheap and high qualified work force (relative to Rio de Janeiro, where I am) but things like that are going to drive me away from it. Argentinean politics reminds me of Brazil in the 60ies. It's sad since it used to be a way better country than Brazil or Chile but today it's seems like it's going down the Bolivia route.
The goverment doesn't decide WHO can and can not be an ISP. The goverment just say WHAT you need to do in order to become one.
And I tottally agree with that.
Actually, South America is the original America.
When Amerigo Vespucci explored the coast of Brazil in the early 1500s the data he brought back to Europe was used by a cartographer to draw a map where the land was named America in his honor. The naming of North America came later.
In conclusion, and at the risk of being moderated "flamebait", I must say that to me a citizen of North America calling himself an American is more or less like a citizen of West Virginia calling himself a Virginian. Not quite correct historically, but OK, so what.
Well - it doesn't say "Your rights online IN AMERICA", does it? It looks to me that some country is diddling around with their citizens rights to get online with the company of their choice. Rights. Online. OK, maybe it has little to do with YOUR rights, but then, who the hell are YOU?
Actually Argentina is in America...
Yes, sure. They establish requirements as they would for anyone who wants to run a business. But it's not that they can say "Hey, I don't like your face, you don't get a license". In this case there was a merger a couple of years ago which was illegal and was the reason they took their license away (justice seldom works here and when it does it's real slow, that's why it took so long).
Yes, we call them 1st Lady. There are term limits: 4 years and 2 consecutive administrations. But this goverment (wife and husband) is not known for its transparency. They are agressive, rely on patronage and are constantly lying and distorting the reality of the country (statistics are compromised, there is a huge insecurity problem which is labeled as a "sensation"). I always find it hard to explain to people from other countries what the reality of this country is since it is so corrupted at every single level, that they can't often believe it.
1.000.000 suscriptors plus their families.
DNA in your Linux: DNALinux
Is the almost same thing on Brazil, with the TV company "Globo".
Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
If you have been following Argentinian politics, this supposed "defense of competition" is BS. This is just a political vendetta. If they were really, really operating as a good telecom regulator they would force them to sell a majority share of the company or something like that instead of this insanity of forcing a 1.5 million subscriber ISP to just close down.
The stupidity, selfishness and sheer short sightedness of the Argentinian governing elite is just mind blowing.
I'm from Uruguay. In times like this I just thank the River Plate for existing and 19th century British diplomats for forcing us to become an independent, separate country.
But it's the law! You can't possibly question the law.
Hold it a second, you have to have a license to provide Internet access to people? And you are OK with that? You are OK with the government deciding who can and cannot be an ISP?
Hold it a second, you have to have a license to provide Telephone access to people? And you are OK with that? You are OK with the government deciding who can and cannot be an Telephone company?
I don't see much difference between the two, both are common carrier services.
Here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Brindis_Noble_Videla.jpg
Mrs. Noble (chief of Clarin) toasts to the establishment of Papel Prensa, the nation's main newsprint maker, with the President, General Jorge Videla, in 1978.
See also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernestina_Herrera_de_Noble
You think anyone in Europe or the US can just start throwing fiber without submitting to regulatory practices to be an ISP? ISPs are held to many legal standards in data retention and privacy and whatnot.
I am unaware of any licensing or regulatory requirements to be an ISP in the U.S.. There are some regarding running wires or other infrastructure, but any company that has access to the infrastructure to provide Internet service is allowed to do so without any further government intervention that I am aware of.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Now, if the claims that the Kirchner's were friendly to Clarin when they got support from them, is another history, but, if communications licenses are not legally transferable like some argentinians posters say, this is more a problem of stupid management than anything else.
Certainly, if Clarin group whasn't one of the main supporters of the murderous Argentina's dictators of the 1970's their claims of freedom of the press would hold more wather and not be simple posturing.
Mexico: 100% conservative's America now!
And you are OK with that? You are OK with the government deciding who can and cannot be an ISP?
This may come as a bit of a surprise, but government isn't treated as "them" everywhere in the world. In some places we consider government to be an extension of "us". And yes, I do like ISP's and other companies that control infrastructure vital to the well-being of my country to be accountable to "us".
People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
So, that was a 2 years time frame. Doesn't it sounds suspicious? How convenient, Clarin is posting news about government corruption and suddenly they realize is bad for consumers? And how "good for consumers" would be now that people would have no choice but the telcos? Either you don't understand, or you are one of the payed cyber-activist of the corrupted-kirchner government.
Man, you should see a doctor... =)
And you are OK with that? You are OK with the government deciding who can and cannot be an ISP?
This may come as a bit of a surprise, but government isn't treated as "them" everywhere in the world. In some places we consider government to be an extension of "us". And yes, I do like ISP's and other companies that control infrastructure vital to the well-being of my country to be accountable to "us".
That works fine until you are in the minority on some subject, then you have empowered the government to silence your opinion. See companies are already accountable to "us", if I don't like the behavior of a particular company, I don't do business with them.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
you are so right. I have fibertel too, but i prefer to lose my internet connection, other than giving more power to the Prima monopoly.
It's annoying to always hear the line "you used to be assholes with us, but now you can't cause your country is fucked up" whenever something bad happens in Argentina.
Grupo Clarin's reach is so large that they control most of the public thinking
I think you underestimate us (the Argentinians).
when something mysterious happened and they became enemies
The rumor goes that President Kirchner tried to buy Canal 13, a public TV channel, but Clarín wasn't selling, and that started their enmity.
this mutual destruction between the media monopoly and the current government (one of the most corrupt governments in our history) is probably very beneficial for the country
No act of economic destruction can benefit the country. This is yet another example of argentine blindness...
And why didn't you change your provider earlier? Oh right, because the other alternatives are crap...
It is also annoying to see an attempt to a cheerful joke to be read as a mock. You must be bitter. And a typical south american who thinks that other countries get happy when one is going through a bad patch. That's why south america can't progress. All the countries are against each other.
Ups ... forgot a couple of details.
- Presidential couple were very good friends with the Clarin group (that is how they got all of their mergers approved) until for political interests, Clarin published front page with disgruntled farmers... suddenly all the love was gone.
- Until that moment, a large chunk of the government advertising budget was being spent on Clarins media. Now we dont know where that money is going, sure not Clarin but somewhere else, that information has been "classified" for containing "personal information" (wwwhat?? is MY money!!!!)
- We have seen public disputes (one of the Kirchners minions interrupted a meeting with box gloves last week) between government and group Clarin. There is no interest by any of them (Clarin or the government) on "justice" or "protect the customers".
- The other two largest ISPs are par of Telecom and Telefónica. Kirchner has been trying to get Telecom for a long time using some friends in other holdings (W Group).
- Even if there might be several ISPs on Buenos Aires, I am pretty sure they cannot absorb so many customers so soon. And outside Buenos Aires the situation is worst.
- According to a government letter they are trying to protect as from monopolistic behavior... now, do you protect from monopoly by eliminating competition? weird.
I think that any reasonable government will heavily fine Fibertel (Clarin group), make them get everything according to the law and let them continue with business. Thus you send a clear message that breaking the monopoly law is very verrryy expensive, you protect the job of a lot of people and the customer who is happy with their service.
just my 2 peso cents
You've not been inerrant here (nor consistent in maturity level!), but your ability to dissect an issue, especially a kind that strong feelings end up muddying the thinking of most people on, is very appealing to a few and I wish you hadn't posted AC so that I could Slashdot friend you. (I must continue maintaining my own anonyminity to the dullard masses here, as there are plenty others who feel this need to correct by attacking one's karma instead.)
I'm the goddamn Batman.
I'm one of the affected million and I will have to change ISPs. Fibertel used to throttle youtube all the time, but apart from that the service was good, if a little expensive. They are part of a huge news-controlling monopoly, broke the law, and they got what they deserve. There are many choices of broadband internet over here, so I basically don't give a sh*t.
It is a political decision, so are the new advances on the "Papel Prensa" company.
Unfortunatelly the Kirchner's Government, very much based on chavez policies on governing, have found this to be yet another tool to control upcoming election results, which can be clearly predicted into their re-election. unfortunatley, just as in Venezuela where Superman voted, argentine --READ: ARGENTINE!!!! it is not argentinian brutes!!!!--- eleccions will have this probable outcome.
Now as for what is going on: the goverment actually pays people for doing their political "advertising" (or actually discrediting any opposition) on the internet.
Fibertel is jut a name, but it is just one more step in the dictatorship decisions made by the presidential couple, who have been constantly attacking freedom of speech and thought.
The excuse for an "antimonopoly" is actually an oxymoron in this case. if fibertel is disbanned, then people will fall into Telecom's internet. Controlling (as a monopoly!) communications, with the slight bonus of being in great part owned by the Kirchers.
as i said this is not about Fibertel, or Papel Prensa, or Clarin, it is about a government doing what they want, with no regards for the law. (and this is being done one year prior to the elections)
PS: it was not the bicentennial on may 25th, bicentennial is on July 9th 2016. That's when independence actually happens. Yet another chance to use a patriotic date, and mislead the people, as a self promoting reelection campaign (payed by taxes).
Actually, the government is the one exercising its right to shut down a non-law-complying enterprise. Its the ISP who is at fault here, and that should be clear after all the comments and article detailing the situation.
Yes, there is a "war" between the government and the media group. Yes, they both use every chance they have to f*ck (for lack of a better word) each other. That doesn't mean the government isn't right on this one.
The issue at hand is quite simple: although the merge between Cablevision and Fibertel was very polemic, it was approved non the less (I wouldn't say the President did it, but, the national office in charge of supervising such events did approve it, if I recall correctly). Any way, the problem is not with the merge. The problem is with the communications license. The are lacking one since 2003, and when in 2009 they dissolved Fibertel, and left it only as a brand, they actually eliminated the only license they had (which, by the way, was questionable as to weather it was valid or not after the acquisition).
Pardon my non-native English.
The other day I was walking on the street and saw a graffiti that resumes (IMO) the current state of the problem between Grupo Clarin and the Government, but from the side that matters, which is the side of the people: The government pees on us and the media tell us that it is raining. This basically resumes who is who here. Argentina is VERY divided and almost everyone takes one side or the other without actually thinking that neither of the parties is makes any "good" to our society. And this is historical. This is why we were once a world power and now we're even less than a 3rd world country. Our story is really really sad. And as I said, neither Fibertel nor the Government is right. Grupo Clarin *probably* broke some laws but as other poster said here, it's not cool to have laws for an ISP to operate, I didn't knew that there was laws covering that. And the Government is being totally and completely biased on this decision. I hate the companies and my Government. Sorry. I really think we as Argentinians need to start thinking for ourselves.
maybe like : it's a precedent, any country that doesn't object it (because it's only internet access and no sweat shops or flood)might in fact agree and do the same later on ?
beware he who denies you access to information for in his mind, he already deems himself to be your master (SMAC-ish)
the idea that a government can just hand-wave and shutdown a major ISP is somewhat unsettling. Even though this doesn't affect me personally, I would still consider this a "rights" issue - as in the right to choose one's ISP, without the government interfering and saying who can and who can't be an ISP.
This is "the" point in this issue, Fibertel has ceased to exist in 2009, they merged with another company, which voided their license. They even admitted it and put it in a report when they wanted founding on London (Spanish only, sorry http://bit.ly/9V1bOf).
The government did not shut down an ISP, they pointed a company which was doing business without a valid license and forced them to stop doing it.
Please tell me who exactly broke which law? The ISP is not getting closed because of any law-breaking, it is more like the goverment used a tecnicality to close it just because they wanted to. I like to get my news from the Clarin group, I don't see it a as news-controlling monopoly because there are other sources, I just trust Clarin more than the other sources (like Govermennt oficial news). There are some places where there were only 2 ISPs so closing one will lead to a monopoly, how come you don't give a sh*t about that?
without the government interfering and saying who can and who can't be an ISP.
Why should the government be interfering? Do they say who can and can't sell chocolate bars? How about pour cement?
AccountKiller
I've had Fibertel for over 10 years now and undoubtedly it's the lesser evil of all ISP providers around here (service works and rarely gets cut like the other providers) and I give a rat's ass about monopolies.
I'll give you my cablemodem when you take it from my cold, dead hands!
I live in Argentina and my main concern is not Fibertel or the government, it is people.
Our current government is corrupt, definitely has an agenda, but so does Grupo Clarín.
Nevertheless, most people want to "save" Fibertel. There are facebook groups, people joining to set up a protest, etc just because they hate the government.
Everyone seems to forget that Grupo Clarín is an inch from owning ALL major ISPs in the country (Due to the telefónica-telecom merge that is still haunting us, and is a reality in Europe) and that it has been largely linked to the Menemist-era agenda that made this country the chaotic place it is now.
So PLEASE put your political views aside and focus on the facts: if Fibertele is not authorized to be an ISP, the government is absolutely in its right to shut down operations, even if that means that a million people will have to switch to another ISP (and again, Telfonicas Speedy, Cablevision's Fibertel and Telecom's Arnet are owned by Grupo Clarin in some way).
Please stop bitching about Fibertel, they never provided a good service, and no one ever liked them here, no wonder we call their technicians Fibercops!
Three days ago Clarin's newspaper put an article on it's website about what happened and let his readers to post comments, the funny thing is that it was the first time ever that Clarin had comments on an any of its articles. I posted a comment and because it wasn't on Clarin's side it was removed, as well as all the other comments against them.
How easy is it for you to change providers? is 90 days enough time for you as a consumer?
Do you work for the Argentine government? Are you a shameless syndicalist getting paid in "choripans"? Are you just an idiot? Which is it? I'd like to know because Ms.Kirchner seems committed to destroying any profitable industry in Argentina. Do you have any idea how much damage she has done with her crusade against farmers? Do you have any idea how many people will LOSE THEIR JOBS because "Ms. Too much plastic surgery" decided the make "too much money"???
Now she's picking on Fibertel so that she either gets a huge bribe or she shuts them down because she can. If Fibertel were a monopoly, a trial should be in order. This fascist, despotic president behaves like a capricious 5 year old at best, like a communist dictator at worst. That, Nicola is no way to run a country. She "inherited" a country that worked hard to recover from the crisis of 2003 and she is leading it right into another one for her own financial and political gain.
If you are not qualified to make an educated statement, I suggest you keep your comments to yourself.