Printed from http://www.electronista.com

Government agreements blocking wide citizen fiberoptic access

updated 10:11 am EDT, Wed June 4, 2014

Verizon, Comcast anti-compete agreements, other legislation stymie process

Many US cities have large fiberoptic networking installations, paid for by taxpayer dollars, that are "dark," unknown, or unusable -- primarily due to telecom company lobbyists and threats to localities. At least 20 states have enacted laws or other legal barriers to prevent community access to these networks, and even more have signed non-compete agreements with Internet providers.

Washington DC and surrounding communities have access to the country's first 100Gbps fiberoptic network, but it is only accessible to non-profits and the government. Comcast threatened to cut off cable access to the metropolis if the higher-speed network was opened to the public, and following the re-negotiation that saw many Internet and cable TV bills jump by 30 percent nearly overnight, Comcast agreed to provide access to the network for the "exclusive use" of the government. The agreement mandated that the city not perform "any activities or outcomes that would result in business competition between the District and Comcast" despite the network being heavily subsidized by tax dollars. A similar agreement with Verizon continues the block to the network to this day.

Vice notes that in 2009, a bill was introduced in North Carolina which lawmakers decided would "create extraordinary financial accounting and administrative burdens on municipal broadband providers that would render their existence fiscally difficult, if not impossible." The bill heavily favored extant networks in its attempt to level the playing field between telecommunication companies and municipalities trying to build fiber networks, and its goal was very thinly veiled during the debate and approval process.

San Francisco, home to technology giants, also has a fiberoptic network not available to its citizens. It is trying to build a business plan to allow local businesses to resell the fiber, but in order to break even on the plan, fiber access would have to be offered at $200 a month, just to meet costs.

Municipal fiber networks are the key to improving average US connection speeds. The FCC is about to issue a call for public remarks increasing what it calls broadband, which will drop the number of citizens technically considered served by the telecommunications industry. The prevalent non-compete agreements blocking citizen access to these networks all over the country are harmful to wide broadband deployment, and are indicative of a larger problem with the regulatory climate favoring telecommunications company interests over that of the people of the United States.

Fiberoptic network locations in US
Fiberoptic network locations in US




By Electronista Staff
Post tools:

TAGS :

toggle

Comments

  1. pairof9s

    Mac Enthusiast

    Joined: 01-03-08

    This matter along with net neutrality is just frightening. It seems there is no one speaking for the American public's interest...not even bullshitting politicians! If you want to see a wonderfully spot-on but hilarious take on this matter, check out John Oliver's Last Week Tonight sketch:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpbOEoRrHyU&sns=fb

  1. I-ku-u

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: 08-08-11

    Last year, I had an illuminating conversation with one of my city's councilmen. Federal regulations inhibit our city's ability to negotiate with ISPs to such a degree we can't affect Comcast's behavior (the local monopoly) and we can't provide enough incentive for a competitor to move in.

  1. Makosuke

    Forum Regular

    Joined: 08-06-01

    It's ironic that on one hand, the big ISP telecom companies want no government regulation on what they are and aren't allowed to do with their networks--because, you know, regulation is bad for competition--but when a municipality wants to compete with them, suddenly they turn to legislation to prevent that competition--because, you know, regulation is necessary for competition.

    Or at least it is when it negatively affects your competition, particularly when you know you can't sit back and continue to enjoy your tasty monopoly position without it.

    Hey, telecoms--if your service is so great, why are you afraid of municipalities providing municipal broadband? Surely people would see how much better and cheaper your service is and just go with it...

  1. chimaera

    Forum Regular

    Joined: 04-08-07

    I'd settle for them growing into each others' territories to compete. Instead of always stopping at the border of the next company.

    If they actually started competing with each other for customers, they wouldn't worry so much about municipal broadband.

  1. Fides

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: 11-16-09

    When I lived in a hamlet of less than 75 people in South Dakota I had access to a fiber optic network. The local phone / internet / cable company was a cooperative of the people who lived in the area (we elected our own board). Access was 31 dollars a month. I moved to California and I am stuck with Comcast or AT&T with vastly inferior service and product and three times the price. I'm going to start to lobby my state representatives/senators.

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.

toggle

Network Headlines

toggle

Most Popular

Sponsor

Recent Reviews

Crucial MX100 256GB SATA-3 SSD

While the price-per-gigabyte ratio for magnetic platter-based hard drives can't be beat, the speed that a SSD brings to the table for ...

Narrative Clip

With the advent of social media technology, people have been searching for new ways to share the events of their daily lives -- be it ...

Blue's Mikey Digital

Blue Microphones, a company that makes some of the most popular digital USB microphones among podcasters and musicians, has for some t ...

Sponsor

toggle

Most Commented

 
toggle

Popular News