Hello Patrick,

PL> Respectfully, I think your gasoline analogy is flawed. The gasoline in your
PL> tank is a fixed quantity you acquired for a fixed price. When that fixed
PL> quantity has been depleted, you will need to return to the vendor for more.
PL> Your willingness to share that fixed quantity has no impact on the gasoline
PL> vendor. However, with respect to your xDSL, if you are paying a flat fee for
PL> an unlimited or even unfixed quantity, then you are offering your friend
PL> something you would not otherwise use and, in fact, do not retain in your
PL> stock. You are offering him something sitting in the vendor's resale stock.
PL> I would argue you have not right to do so, even if that stock cost only 1
PL> cent. 

Statement was fine, in this case the fixed property is the
bandwidth... once it's all gone you start seeing performance
degradation etc...

PL> If, however, your usage you pay for is fixed, say capped at 2gig, then you
PL> could offer it for your friends. That 2gig resides in your personal stock,
PL> once depleted you would have to return to the vendor for more. The provider
PL> is therefore not injured by you action.

Which is the case on all providers in Australia, and one or 2 of them
bluntly put it as such...

PL> Having said that, I personally would ultimately like to see government
PL> ownership of fiber optic transcontinental lines, then perhaps state and then
PL> local control of feeder runs much like the method used by the US federal
PL> interstate system, state highway, and county roads. I do not think there is
PL> money enough in the transport of IP to support maintenance and expansion,
PL> and I would like to see our tax dollars qualifying us to use have access to
PL> the media. Then all we would pay for would be content. I am increasingly
PL> uncomfortable with content providers owning infrastructure.

Our government half owns the local monopoly, and it's no better then
any other monopoly people bitch and moan about, in fact could be the
worst out of the lot of them, not only is it anti-competitive and does
everything it can to interfere with competition where possible, but
the govt refuses to do anything about it. There are areas of Sydney
that can't even get DSL... (due to pair gains/rims, or just not having
dslams installed...). Then again most of the problems are most likely
due to the 49.5% non-govt owned share holders that don't give a crap
who they screw as long as their making $4bill in profits...

-- 
Best regards,
 evilbunny                            mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.cacert.org - Free Security Certificates
http://www.nodedb.com - Think globally, network locally
http://www.sydneywireless.com - Telecommunications Freedom

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Reply via email to