Home page logo

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

RE: HR 1542 [OT, anti-BS attempt, US]
From: "M. David Leonard" <mdl () equinox shaysnet com>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 16:46:37 -0400 (EDT)


        Maybe you feel comfortable with the extent of regulation you see 
(or think you see) in Florida but after a few years on the cable 
advisory board in Greenfield, Massachusetts, I can tell you that there is 
no effective regulation here.  I seriously doubt that there is meaningful 
cable regulation anywhere but I am willing to be corrected.  At least in 
Massachusetts, cable advisory boards are a sick joke.

                                        David Leonard

On Mon, 7 May 2001, Greg Maxwell wrote:

On Mon, 7 May 2001, Roeland Meyer wrote:

Cable operators are unregulated local monopolies.

No. They are regulated, by the franchise agreement. If the agreement isn't
strong enough to ensure the highest best use of public right-of-way then
it's a failure of the local government for not making it so (or the
state/FCC for forbiding the local governments from placing certain
requirements in the agreement).

It appears that there is a lot of shooting from the hip going on here.
cable regulation is fraught with legal complications and is changing
rapidly right now, and the layman anaysis going on here isn't doing the
topic justice.

It's additionally complicated by the fact that the laws differ from state
to state. In Florida, it's covered by Sec. 166.046, Florida Statutes and
the Communications Act of 1934, the Cable Communications Policy Act of
1984, the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of
1992, and the Telecommunications Act of 1996.

If there is any intrest, I believe that Martin County (Fl)'s 1999
agreement with Adelphia is online someplace, I could track down a
URL for it.

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]