Search:  

 
 
   News
newer
story category The FCC's Legal Battlefield
Accosted from both sides over triennial review
(old news - 06:10PM Tuesday Sep 16 2003)
tags: legal · fcc
Now that telco and CLEC lawyers have had time to fully digest the FCC's triennial review, the lawsuits have started to roll. Both Verizon Communications and the United States Telecom Association (USTA) recently filed individual suits claiming that the FCC acted illegally by allowing the states to manage regional phone competition.

The telcos are upset over the fact that the unbundled network element platform (UNE-P) was preserved, which allows local providers (and small broadband providers if they offer voice) to continue to share the bell lines. As an apparent concession, the FCC recently indicated they were willing to look at modifying the TELRIC pricing formula used to determine those rates.

Last Friday the USTA, Verizon, SBC, BellSouth and Qwest filed a petition in the D.C. Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals to delay the implementation of the triennial review guidelines.

Meanwhile NY Broadband ISP Bway.net is hoping to gather some support among independent ISP's for a class action lawsuit against the FCC. Many smaller ISP's feel they simply won't be able to survive under the new regulatory guidelines. Larger independent ISP's remain confident their size will allow them to negotiate reasonable rates with the incumbents.

Related:
  1. FCC: Broadband Plan Will Be Huge
  2. Exploring FCC Warrantless Home Searches
  3. McDowell Gets Another Term At FCC
  4. GAO On Broadband: Please Listen To Us. For Once. Please.
  5. Small ISPs Want FCC To Ban ESPN 360 Model
  6. 'New' FCC, Same Regulatory Rubber Stamp For CenturyLink
  7. FCC Greenlights Centurytel/Embarq With Wimpy Conditions
  8. FCC Cleans Up 'Forbearance' Process
Forums » The FCC's Legal Battlefield
view: topics flat text 
Post a:

Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Sarasota, FL
clubs:
·VoicePulse


It's not about the money....

It is all about the competition, or the lack of that the telco's are interested in. I have DSL through a Verizon line reseller, my package is faster than anything Verizon would let me pay for. I tried, I really really tried, went all the way up to the business end, and even they wouldn't offer me a package this fast. The reseller did, and thus got my business. Same verizon line, the reseller just didn't choose to tell me what I could and couldn't pay for. (and it works flawlessly I might add) This is an even more obvious problem now that Verizon has changed to their "everyone gets one rate, but with varied connection speed" policy.

The telco's just need to learn how to compete, something they are not very good at. They prefer to have the monopoly in any given area, as it allows them to dictate prices and policies that they couldn't with a competitor nipping at their heals.

[text was edited by author 2003-09-16 18:40:36]
markopoleo

join:2003-04-02
Bonne Terre, MO
·Charter Pipeline


Re: It's not about the money....

said by Camelot One See Profile

The telco's just need to learn how to compete, something they are not very good at. They prefer to have the monopoly in any given area, as it allows them to dictate prices and policies that they couldn't with a competitor nipping at their heals.

[text was edited by author 2003-09-16 18:40:36:



You hit the nail on the head.
--
If PLC goes mainstream, every other broadband provider will be considered what dialup is today...not broadband.
pkust

join:2001-08-09
Houston, TX

Maybe it's time to turn back the clock

Telcos don't want competition, don't like competition, and don't understand competition. That conclusion seems inescapable.

Given telco hostility to any form of competition, I am beginning to believe that any effort to bring competitive pressure to telco services is doomed to failure from the onset. No matter what forces are brought to bear, telcos will always seek to circumvent measures intended to promote competition.

Perhaps the solution is to let the telcos keep their monopolies--and make them stay in their monopolies. Give them a monopoly on local loops--and forbid them from ever doing anything with those loops but reselling them to a DSL vendor, VoIP vendor, et cetera. Let them keep a monopoly on local exchange service--and forbid them from selling VoIP or any other type of service.

Build the telcos a walled garden where they can play king to their hearts' content, so the rest of the world can get back to doing business in a rational, efficient, and competitive fashion.
--
Cordially,

Peter Nayland Kust
pkust@smsysinc.com
Secure Mobile Systems, Inc.
www.smsysinc.com

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK

Re: Maybe it's time to turn back the clock

The ILEC idea of competition is "We take everything we want, everything that makes good money, and is easy to do. Anything we don't want, don't care about, or is very hard to turn a profit on... the competition can have that."
clecrupt9

join:2002-01-22
GA
Yes, structural separation.... worth looking at.

How is it this has not already happened somewhere?
nasadude

join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast

it's also about control

Obviously, if Camelot One got a faster speed from a reseller, the ILEC could have given him this speed if it so chose. For whatever reason, however, they chose not to; maybe they didn't want customers to know they could get faster speeds; maybe those speeds at this time didn't fit into some plan the ILEC had down the road; or maybe the ILEC refused to provide that speed just because they could.

The ILECs want to control every aspect of their lines so they can maximize their profits now and into the foreseeable future.

Soapm

join:2001-07-15
Aurora, CO

Re: it's also about control

said by nasadude See Profile:
Obviously, if Camelot One got a faster speed from a reseller, the ILEC could have given him this speed if it so chose. For whatever reason, however, they chose not to;
The ILECs want to control every aspect of their lines so they can maximize their profits now and into the foreseeable future.
You also must consider overhead. A small/new company has less overhead and so can charge lower prices for the same product. ILECs have tons of fat like tenured employees with good benefit packages, network upkeep/upgrades and don't forget the price tag for the big boys at the top. Investors also expect a bit.

reub2000
Premium
join:2001-12-28
Evanston, IL


We need competition.

»apnews.excite.com/article/200309···RG0.html

quote:
Reynolds said a key reason why Japan and South Korea are so far ahead is because of heavy competition among broadband providers. The Japanese and South Korean governments have taken steps to encourage the use of broadband, such as requiring telephone companies to let competitors use existing lines at low cost.
Seems like the oposite of whats happaning here.
[text was edited by author 2003-09-16 22:45:00]

xerodustrial

@attbi.com

Re: We need competition.

That's because we're America, and we're awesome like that! [no.]

TheMadSwede
Premium
join:2001-01-30
Holland, MI
Just for the sake of an honest look at US broadband, more competition is not the only reason those countries are ahead. There are many other reasons as well.
--
Cable Cable Cable...keep that cable rolling.
Forums » The FCC's Legal Battlefield


Saturday, 04-Jul 20:11:04 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 9.5 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.republican-creole