republican-creole
Search:  

 
 
   All ForumsHot TopicsGallery






how-to block ads


 
Forums » SBC's Answer to TV Franchise Hangup: Don't Seek Any » Similar to VOIP
Uniqs:
18
Share Topic:
RSS topic:
toggle:
flat / full
normal / watch
Post a:
Post a:
Don't Need Franchise Agreements anymore »
« What do the local governments need to "authorize"?  
jojodancer

join:2003-07-22
Burlington, VT

Similar to VOIP

This is similar to VOIP providers going ahead using the status qou and avoiding any regulation by labeling themselves as a data service. I don't see how tv via dsl is much different.

winky
Turn Left At The Moon

join:2001-02-11
Saint Louis, MO

Re: Similar to Business as Usual

Indeed. This is one instance where SBC and I agree. What reason is there for a franchise, except to allow the parties involved, a method by which to protect their investment. Allowing a cable company a reasonable expectation to recoup their investment in an area and a governing body to make commercial services available to their constituents in such a manner as to protect the consumer. This begs the question: What will SBC receive from the franchising body? The answer of course is, nothing. No access rights, easements, or tax incentives that aren't already in place. Consequently if SBC receives nothing, where is the leverage to force it into a franchise agreement? How does adding a "feature" to an existing service make you a completely different enterprise? It doesn't of course unless you view the situation from the cable industry's perspective. The cable companies have a point of course. Being under their respective franchise agreements, they may face restrictions that SBC would avoid, but that's not SBC's problem because they're not receiving the consequent benefits the cable companies are. SBC may seem like the good guy in all of this, and in this case I feel that they are. Unfortunately SBC has used the same apples to oranges comparisons to battle the cable companies in their quest to offer data and voice services. Both industries would like you to think that their focus is you, the consumer, and that bringing better and more varied services is their goal, which it is, as long as you fall on the plus side of their bottom lines. Suffice to say, neither industry is looking out for the individual consumer, or the advancement of entertainment/communications in the country, and will not hesitate to malign each other at the first opportunity over injustices; be they real, perceived, or fabricated. We can only hope that eventually, in the end, it's the consumer that receives the benefit of better services at a fair price, When?, you may ask, will this happen? Perhaps it will only be after the FTC steps in and clarifies a few things, which is oh so long overdue. For now though, a good start would be for someone to step in and put these fussy toddlers down for a nap or an extended "time out" while mommy and daddy discuss a few parenting guidelines, until then it's pandemonium at the entertainment/communication household.
--
If you can break it,I can fix it.Of course, It'll cost ya'
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20

Re: Similar to Business as Usual

Franchise authorities should go the way side the same way out door antennas are.

The FCC should once and for all classify any provider that delivers void, video, an/or data as "broadband" providers and level the playing field. Eventually they will all use similar technogies like IPTV and VOIP to deliver services anyway.. the only thing that will divide these providers is the cable strung to deliver the services.

Maybe ALL companies should negotiate with an LFA, or they don't do it at all and they do in fact deal at the state level.

However, our law makers are not that bright in the first place and will continue to confuse the situation which will further delay advancements in technology - then claim they need to run muni systems because they can do it better.
Forums » SBC's Answer to TV Franchise Hangup: Don't Seek AnyDon't Need Franchise Agreements anymore »
« What do the local governments need to "authorize"?  


Tuesday, 24-Nov 19:27:25 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.republican-creole
page compression OFF
Most commented news this week
· [99] New AT&T Ad Campaign Hits Back At Verizon
· [84] New Bill Takes Aim At Higher Verizon ETFs
· [66] Apple Joins AT&T Verizon Snark Fest
· [39] In-Flight Internet Headed For Bumpy Landing?
· [31] Senators Want ACTA Made Public
· [30] Earthlink Suffers From Major E-mail Outage
· [30] AT&T Offers New Prepaid Wireless plans
· [28] Frontier Increases Modem Rental Fee
· [16] Vivendi In Way Of Comcast's NBC Desires
· [15] Charter Still Fighting With Creditors
Most people now reading
· Climate Change Scandal Erupts After Email Hack. [Security]
· Mysterious $800 Cash Deposit? [General Questions]
· 3.x Feral Druid - Bear Tanking Guide [World of Warcraft]
· HOW-TO: QoS and Tomato (fixes "choppy voice") [MagicJack]
· Windows 7 boot manager editing questions [Microsoft Help]
· Slow speeds in the evenings [TekSavvy]
· What to use while demonoid is down? [Filesharing Software]
· Getting ready to pull the trigger, still have cold feet. [VOIP Tech Chat]
· [ PVP] 3.2 DK PvP D/W Spec... [World of Warcraft]
· CTV & Canwest ask CRTC to order blocking of U.S. programs [TekSavvy]