> > > > Obviously, this probably won't happen. The Telcos in the US have far > > too powerful a lobbying force, but, I think that would be the best > > thing for the consumers. > > Presumably for both the consumers *and* every company involved in > network services who doesn't have the luck of a historical last-mile > monopoly. > > Regards, > Tim.
Well, I really don't see this whole thing as about Comcast, per se. It is bigger than that. Generally, I have no problems with a network doing whatever it wants to do when there is competition for the end users. The problem in my mind comes in when the buyer has no realistic alternative. So I believe the regulations should be at the local level where the actual users are because what is true in Omaha might not be true in Wichita. Attempting to make "one size fits all" regulations at the federal level generally doesn't turn out well, even if done with the best of intentions, because there are just too many one-off situations. Places that, for example, have competition for high-speed triple-play services where the users can "vote with their feet" if a provider's policies don't serve their needs probably need a lot less regulation than a place with only one provider of that sort of service. This shouldn't devolve into a "bash Comcast" session so much as it should address how "single player" markets are handled regardless of the provider involved.
