Ah yes, the dreaded doomaflotchy.
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 3:08 PM, Bill Prince <[email protected]> wrote:
> There will have to be some "cost of entry", otherwise every Tom, Dick, &
> Harry is going to call him/herself an internet provider so that s/he can
> hang his/her doomaflotchy on a pole.
>
> bp
> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>
>
> On 3/12/2015 1:06 PM, Bruce Robertson wrote:
>
> The point is, now you don't have to go through that hassle.
>
> On 03/12/2015 12:45 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>
> Not that exciting as if I wanted those, I'd just file to be a CLEC.
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ------------------------------
> *From: *"Chuck McCown" <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
> *To: *[email protected]
> *Sent: *Thursday, March 12, 2015 2:37:47 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Light Reading
>
> Y’all now have the rights to pole contacts and rights of way. Even
> though it says ROWs controlled by a utility, I am pretty sure that public
> entities cannot discriminate against all you telecommunications providers
> and have to treat you equal to the others. Just cite “network neutrality”
> rules if they balk.
>
> 56. Section 224: Ensuring Infrastructure Access. For broadband Internet
> access service, we
> do not forbear from section 224 and the Commission’s associated procedural
> rules (to the extent they
> apply to telecommunications carriers and services and are, thus, within
> the Commission’s forbearance
> authority).53 Section 224 of the Act governs the Commission’s regulation
> of pole attachments. In
> particular, section 224(f)(1) requires utilities to provide cable system
> operators and telecommunications
> carriers the right of “nondiscriminatory access to any pole, duct,
> conduit, or right-of-way owned or
> controlled” by a utility.54 Access to poles and other infrastructure is
> crucial to the efficient deployment of
> communications networks including, and perhaps especially, new entrants.
>
> !DSPAM:2,5501ecfa184921480014006!
>
>
>
>
