3 ms·

Also: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/qkvn4x/the-21-laws-states-use-to-crush-broadband-competition https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/qkvn4x/

Also: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/qkvn4x/the-21-laws-states-use-to-crush-broadband-competition https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/qkvn4x/the-21-law...

rayiner 9y ago
Most states, including many of the most populous, New York, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Illinois, Georgia, Texas, etc., have no such laws. Many of the states that do have such laws don't have restrictive ones (e.g. in Washington, you just have to be a city with the power to make your own ordinances). If municipal broadband was something that would actually happen in the absence of these laws, why don't we see these networks popping up in all the places without such laws?
- philipodonnell 9y ago
  There was a question about citing laws, that link cited 21 of them. Not all cities are building their own internet so that means we don't need to do anything is logic that I just don't follow. My city didn't build their own. Last time it came up the news reported that it was because Comcast bribed the city council to charge unreasonable fees for adding cables to the existing poles and ensure that only Comcast could do the work on their own schedules. No one disputes that, but everyone who can do anything about it shrugs because Comcast is still paying them and its not illegal because money=speech. But I guess because some other states with more broadband competition don't have as many restrictions (sense a link there?), and "all the places" that can haven't built their own broadband, I can no longer complain about not having any competition in my market and my leaders are removing laws that protect me from them but instead put in more laws that protect them from me?
  - rayiner 9y ago
    > Not all cities are building their own internet so that means we don't need to do anything is logic that I just don't follow. If you're citing municipal broadband laws as something suppressing the development of competition, it's fair to point out that most people live in states that don't have such laws, yet we don't see municipal broadband emerging as a source of competition in those states. The U.S. is a big place, and you can probably name anything and find it happening somewhere in the U.S. The question is, what are the things that are actually creating impediments. If states without municipal broadband laws aren't actually building municipal networks, then getting rid of such laws might be a moral victory, but wouldn't actually change anything. > My city didn't build their own. Last time it came up the news reported that it was because Comcast bribed the city council to charge unreasonable fees for adding cables to the existing poles and ensure that only Comcast could do the work on their own schedules. Do you have a link to the story? It seems suspect, because pole attachment rates are governed by formulas set by either the FCC, or by the state (if the state certifies that it regulates such rates). Also, most poles are owned by power companies, and they set the rates, not city councils.

Also: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/qkvn4x/the-21-laws-states-use-to-crush-broadband-competition https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/qkvn4x/the-21-law...

rayiner 9y ago

Most states, including many of the most populous, New York, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Illinois, Georgia, Texas, etc., have no such laws. Many of the states that do have such laws don't have restrictive ones (e.g. in Washington, you just have to be a city with the power to make your own ordinances). If municipal broadband was something that would actually happen in the absence of these laws, why don't we see these networks popping up in all the places without such laws?

philipodonnell 9y ago
There was a question about citing laws, that link cited 21 of them. Not all cities are building their own internet so that means we don't need to do anything is logic that I just don't follow. My city didn't build their own. Last time it came up the news reported that it was because Comcast bribed the city council to charge unreasonable fees for adding cables to the existing poles and ensure that only Comcast could do the work on their own schedules. No one disputes that, but everyone who can do anything about it shrugs because Comcast is still paying them and its not illegal because money=speech. But I guess because some other states with more broadband competition don't have as many restrictions (sense a link there?), and "all the places" that can haven't built their own broadband, I can no longer complain about not having any competition in my market and my leaders are removing laws that protect me from them but instead put in more laws that protect them from me?
- rayiner 9y ago
  > Not all cities are building their own internet so that means we don't need to do anything is logic that I just don't follow. If you're citing municipal broadband laws as something suppressing the development of competition, it's fair to point out that most people live in states that don't have such laws, yet we don't see municipal broadband emerging as a source of competition in those states. The U.S. is a big place, and you can probably name anything and find it happening somewhere in the U.S. The question is, what are the things that are actually creating impediments. If states without municipal broadband laws aren't actually building municipal networks, then getting rid of such laws might be a moral victory, but wouldn't actually change anything. > My city didn't build their own. Last time it came up the news reported that it was because Comcast bribed the city council to charge unreasonable fees for adding cables to the existing poles and ensure that only Comcast could do the work on their own schedules. Do you have a link to the story? It seems suspect, because pole attachment rates are governed by formulas set by either the FCC, or by the state (if the state certifies that it regulates such rates). Also, most poles are owned by power companies, and they set the rates, not city councils.