Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: more on cable companies
From: Jeff Mcadams <jeffm () iglou com>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 22:22:13 -0400


Also sprach RJ Atkinson
At 17:50 07/05/01, Jeff Mcadams wrote:
The legal arguement comes down to.  The cablecos are a monopoly,
period.

In parts of the Boston suburbs, RCN has built a parallel cable TV
system (with DOCSIS cable modem service also) serving houses that were
already (and still are) servicable from Media-One (now part of AT&T
Broadband).

While I applaud those areas then, and I think that's a wonderful thing
in general, and eventually I suspect good will come out of it, though it
might take a while.  Situations like that are very few and far between.
In Louisville, we have had one or two competing cablecos wanting to come
in and build out competing networks.  It looks like its not going to
happen though as TKR^WIntermedia^WInsight has tied up the city and the
newcomers in court over the terms of the franchises and how they relate
to Insight's franchise.

The cable companies, in most places, are a monopoly, and they act like
them.

Again though, the RBOCs are trying to use this to say that two wrongs
make a right.

The current issue before the House is H.R. 1542, and it needs to be
defeated.  Then (although there need not be the distinction of time that
"then" implies...it could happen concurrently, but they aren't the same
discussion), the issue of open access on cable networks can be dealt
with, and I'll be first in line in whatever forum I can find to say that
cable networks need to be effectively opened up.

-- 
Jeff McAdams                            Email: jeffm () iglou com
Head Network Administrator              Voice: (502) 966-3848
IgLou Internet Services                        (800) 436-4456


  By Date           By Thread  

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