[opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review
- From: Craig Birkmaier <brewmastercraig@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 08:49:50 -0400
Regards
Craig
On Jun 29, 2016, at 8:18 PM, Manfredi, Albert E
<albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The Kingsbury Commitment was an out of court settlement, in 1913, CLEARLY
after the government had already mandated telecom network neutrality, in
1910, with the Mann-Elkins act. The law was in place, and AT&T could have
been fined, but they settled out of court instead.
No Bert. The Mann-Elkins Act merely granted the ICC the authority to regulate
the telecommunications industry.
One more time - show me the regulations the ICC created and any attempts by the
ICC to enforce them prior to the Kingsbury Commitment.
The Kingsbury Commitment was the result of an anti-trust investigation by the
Justice Department. It had nothing to do with setting rates, and little to do
with interconnection. It was about the fact that AT&T was building a vertical
monopoly in the telecommunications business, and the agreement ALLOWED AT&T to
build its monopoly - the only "downside" was that AT&T had to divest its
ownership of Western Union.
There was no regulation requiring the interconnection of local exchanges until
the FCC was created and granted Title II authority in 1934.
Like, if you are caught speeding, but settle out of court somehow. Agree to
take a safety course, do some community service, whatever. So what? The fact
that you settled out of court DOES NOT mean that there's no speed limit.
A terrible analogy. The facts say otherwise. The "Committment" DID NOT require
interconnection of local exchanges not owned by AT&T; it did require AT&T to
connect them to its long distance network. The interconnection of local
exchanges became a defacto reality as AT&T bought up almost all of the
independent local exchanges.
As usual, the more Craig digs in with his inane arguments, the more absurd
they become. I quoted the Mann-Elkins act for you, Craig. It is quite
explicit on the matter of interconnection.
Lit is only explicit in that it gave the ICC the authority to regulate in these
areas.
You cannot prove that the ICC exercised this authority. Until you do, you are
simply blowing smoke.
Who owns the INFRASTRUCTURE, Craig? That's what we're talking about.
Which infrastructure. There are MANY. And many piggyback on the first to build
out. Thus it is common for the telcos and cable systems to "attach" to the
utility poles owned by the electric utility in the area. Or they may negotiate
with the right-of-way owners to install underground cables.
They have the natural monopoly. **Unless a utility is publically owned**, and
heaven knows the politicians could force that on the MVPD/ISPs if they
insist, the infrastructure owner becomes a natural monopoly, theoretically
capable of charging whatever the heck they please. Now, explain how multiple
water and sewer pipe systems can coexist in every neighborhood.
Any time there is only one "pipe" or "wire," you could claim it is a natural
monopoly. The question is whether other companies can use this infrastructure
to deliver a service. You could say that highways are a natural monopoly,
except that this is not accurate. The U.S. Is filled with "toll roads" built
with private investment. For the most part these highways are "neutral,"
however, there are many exceptions, such as the "parkways" in your area where
trucks are prohibited.
In the case of ISP service this discussion is meaningless. Typically, we
already have three infrastructures capable of delivering ISP service to the
vast majority of homes in the U.S.; telco, cable and electric. You can add
several more if you want to include wireless data providers. And in some areas
like where you live, there is an overbuild provider offering phone, TV and
broadband
So there is no "natural monopoly here. Unfortunately, the FCC Title II order
may turn cable systems into "preferred" suppliers and discourage more wired
overbuilds. Hopefully wireless data systems will provide real competition in
the future, with the FCC lording over them.
Aside from wireless broadband, which is not a credible alternative for
regular Internet use yet, you and I have at best two options. Two, Craig.
Hardly plenty of competition. With tiny numbers like that, they simply copy
each other's plans, very closely.
Duh. That's what we're discussing here Bert. We are replacing the last century
regulated monopolies, with 21st Century regulated oligopolies. Any illusion of
competition is gone - we just have a few choices that are more than happy to be
regulated in return for the ability to charge monopoly prices.
And yet again, having to belabor the obvious to death.
As with all things political, our country is bogged down belaboring the obvious
to death. Obviously we have different views.
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
- » [opendtv] Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Leonard Caillouet
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review - Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Net Neutrality: Government Control of Your Internet Service | National Review- Craig Birkmaier