Slashdot Mirror


Tom Wheeler Defends Title II Rules, Accuses Pai of Helping Monopolists (arstechnica.com)

simkel shares a report from Ars Technica: Former Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler spoke out against the FCC's proposed repeal of net neutrality rules this week, saying the repeal will help monopoly broadband providers abuse their dominant position. There's "a monopoly provider for three-quarters of the homes in America, and no choice," Wheeler said in a forum (video) in Arlington, Virginia Monday hosted by US Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.). "When you've only got one provider, who makes the rules? The provider makes the rules." Wheeler was referring to FCC data that shows most Americans live in areas with either one provider of high-speed broadband (at least 25Mbps downstream and 3Mbps upstream) or none at all. With the FCC's new Republican leadership seeking to overturn net neutrality rules, "the question becomes, will giant companies be able to exploit their monopoly position?" Wheeler said. "Who is going to stand up for consumers? Who is going to stand up for innovation? And who is going to stand up for the most important network for determining our future in the 21st century?"

2 of 134 comments (clear)

  1. Government created those monopolies by mpercy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    75% of people only have one provider choice because of government grants of monopoly status.

    How about some other options?

    * ISPs cannot be content providers or affiliated with content providers--they can be a data pipe or a content provider but never both
    * In areas where local government has granted access rights to only one provider, use PSC model to mandate that that provider must provide access to other providers for the backbone to the pole (e.g., the gas line to my house was built by one company, but I can chose to get my gas from any provider in the market via the same pipe)
    * Local government could build the pipes and lease them to all providers at the same rates--we can't have 100 companies digging up roads to bury cable or pipes, whether it be for electricity, gas, water, sewer, cable/fiber for TV/internet, but a coordinated infrastructure contracted by local government that does all of the above and then leases non-exclusive access to providers makes a lot of sense

  2. Re: But... FREE ENTERPRISE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Free market is best market.

    However, free does not mean free from regulations. Without regs, powerful companies form and control the market.

    We do not have a free market for internet.

    IMO, regulations should be designed to keep markets free and healthy. This way the market can respond to Changing conditions rather than waiting on congress, who is often ten years behind.

    My idea is this:

    Legislatively separate the markets that have been used to form internet trusts. Basically, trust bust.

    Mandate that you can only own one of the last mile, the ISP, or content creation.

    Make laws regarding collision between such companies.

    Suddenly, you would have your choice of ISP over whatever last mile connects you. And ISPs would have no perverse incentive to control what media you consume.

    BAM.