The FCC has let the other shoe drop, Verizon will no longer be required
to offer wholesale DSL to competitive ISPs. Between this and the Brand X
ruling Time-Warner/Cablevision and Verizon can now run their duopoly
without worry. This means there are only 2 providers of "affordable"
broadband into any dwelling or business in NYC. If this doesn't worry
you it should. Now that the FCC has effectively killed real broadband
competition, what should the concerned NYer do? Maybe it's time to start
caring about Muni-Wifi. What could Muni-Wifi do for NYers?
1. Create competition in broadband services by providing an alternative
to Cable and DSL for last mile access for ISPs.
2. Provide a infrastructure for delivering low cost broadband access to
NYC neediest.
This can be achieved without the city competing with private enterprise
and without funding it with tax payer dollars. Please see my earlier
post on the cooperative wholesale model for municipal broadband:
http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/2005-July/009335.html
- Dustin -
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [CYBERTEL] FCC kills mandated DSL wholesale and sanctifies a
wireline duopoly as vibrant competition - Gone is Muni FTTH?
Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2005 03:50:42 -0400
From: Francois Menard (Mailing List Account) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Telecom Regulation & the Internet
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FCC kills mandated DSL wholesale and sanctifies a wireline duopoly as
vibrant competition - Gone is Muni FTTH?
by François at 02:31AM (CDT) on August 6, 2005 | Permanent Link
http://tim.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2005/8/6/1112664.html
In a press statement issued today, the FCC commissionners have agreed that
the future of broadband in the US was better left in the hands of market
forces.
Commissionner Copps however concedes that what the FCC has chosen to do
today amounts to prospective regulatory making on a purely theoritical
basis. That has not stopped him however from concurring with the other
Commissionners with the only announced accountability of the FCC being
that he says he intends to keep tabs to see if what is supposed to happen
truly does. But just who will be there to keep tabs when the
term of Commissioner Coops expires on May 1, 2006?
In the same statement, the FCC annnounces that it intends to issue a
public inquiry in which it will begin to investigate issues associated
with the walledgardenization of broadband access and by interence, must
now look into intercarrier compensation in the context of broadband
peering at public Internet NAPs which to this date has remained free from
FCC investigations.
While ISPs in Canada can behave like ostriches and duck their heads in the
dirt and avoid thinking about the ripple effects of the FCC continuing to
push the limits of the impossible in avoiding to consider the impact of
their policies on the survival of the same independant ISPs which have
created the market of retail internet services, we can bet that the ILECs
in Canada will take advantage of the Telecom Review and start pointing out
to the grand canyon emerging between CRTC policies and the FCC policies.
In analyzing regulatory policies from the perspective of a regulatory
framework which is supposed to lead to sustainable competition by
remaining conducive to further facilities-based entry, consequences of the
disappearance of mandated wholesale of DSL facilities are evident, that
is, no more reasons for retail price discipline, thus no more price
floors, which will arguably lead to foreclosure of further entry by other
entities than the incumbent Telco's and cable carriers.
Consequently, the risks of Municipal FTTH entry have just been quintupled
- do it and the ILECs and the Cable Carriers will immediately react by
way of targeted decreases of DSL and cable modem services only for as long
as necessary to kill Municipal FTTH while still in the eggshell.
While the FCC is surely not foolish enough to believe that the public
interest will be served by targeted price decreases of ILEC and MSO fat
wasteband, the FCC seems to believe that they are acting in the public
interest in making it more difficult to make a business case for municipal
FTTH.
Unlike the CRTC, the actions of the FCC remain elusive as to whether the
FCC truly believes that its prospective regulatory theories are compliant
with the FCC's statutory obligation to administer a regulatory framework
conducive to sustainable competition by ensuring that regulatory relief
will exist for other carriers than ILEC and MSOs interested in making
investments into their own facilities.
It is frustrating to see the American public endorse the fact that the FCC
will be leading another 7 year market experiementation cycle in total
disregard for the lessons supposed to be learned from the previous
experiementation cycle with telecom competition concluding today.
With today's FCC action, it seems a safe bet that in 7 years, there will
be no more wireline providers serving homes of Americans than their are
today with only some exceptions coming to mind, Lafayette, being the
latest one.
It is sad to see the FCC officialize new rules that will allow targeted
below cost pricing by incumbent Telco's and MSO's with no systematic
regulatory relief before the FCC. This could hardly be construed as a
positive thing.
-=Francois=-
819 692 1383
--
NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/
Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/
Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
