The real issue on this is natural vs. un-natural monopolies.

I can't find the article I read some years ago but here's the gist of it.

There's only so much room for things like water lines, gas lines, electric lines, telephone lines, streets, garbage cans etc. Those PHYSICAL structures lend themselves nicely to monopolies. We really don't need 15 different electric lines running past our houses (though the case could be made as to why that may be a good thing).

Internet access, however, is a SERVICE not a thing. There are multiple ways in which multiple providers can access customers (and vise verse) over EXISTING or unobtrusive distribution mechanisms.

To monopolize internet access would be like trying to monopolize movie theaters, hospitals, auto parts stores etc.

Here's a pretty good article I think (though I only took the time to scan it):
https://www.mises.org/journals/rae/pdf/rae9_2_3.pdf

And for anyone that wants to dig deeper into it:
http://www.google.com/search?q=natural+vs.+unnatural+monopoly&hl=en&lr=

laters,
Marlon
(509) 982-2181                                   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)                    Consulting services
42846865 (icq)                                    And I run my own wisp!
64.146.146.12 (net meeting)
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



----- Original Message ----- From: "Butch Evans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 8:49 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] NYCwireless Network Neutrality Broadband Challenge


On Mon, 7 Nov 2005, Charles Wu wrote:

Electricity, Gas and Water are billed on a usage basis

Competitive market pressures aside, why should Internet be any
different?

Charles,
I don't often find myself in total disagreement with your
statements.  I am on this point, however.  Well, maybe not "total",
but close.  The RBOCs and cableops are working hard to commoditize
the internet connection.  There are efforts on the part of many
municipalities to do the same.  Your city is doing this now.  I am
not sure there is anything we can do to "sway the tide" that seems
to be driven partly by the RBOCs and others, but I don't agree that
internet access fits the same "class" of service as the utilities
you mentioned.

For example, electricity, gas and water are items that are needed
for basic survival in the city.  Granted, these services have not
always been available, but it is expected by all Americans that if
they move somewhere, they can get those services.  Most people would
not survive without these services.  Tell me how internet access
fits that description.

Internet access is something that is NOT required for basic
necessities.  It IS something that most businesses can't do without.
With that in mind, why do you compare it to these other utilities?
I will do ok if the internet access business dries up.  I provide
other services that don't require me to even sell internet access.
These services work over any high speed connection.  One business
feeds the other.

NOW, to answer your original question: I think the question is
framed wrong.  I don't see us EVER getting to the point where we,
the network operator, will be paying for transports with
"origination fees" or "termination fees", as the telcos are doing
now.  Perhaps I missed the point of this conversation, as I have not
read all the posts, but I just don't believe it will ever get there.

--
Butch Evans
BPS Networks  http://www.bpsnetworks.com/
Bernie, MO
Mikrotik Certified Consultant
(http://www.mikrotik.com/consultants.html)

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Reply via email to