3 ms·
It is, in one sense, illegal. "The NOI provides a history of FCC regulations in this area, noting that in 2007 and 2008 the commission “prohibited providers fro
by zonidjan 7y ago
It is, in one sense, illegal. "The NOI provides a history of FCC regulations in this area, noting that in 2007 and 2008 the commission “prohibited providers from entering into or enforcing exclusive agreements to provide services to customers in commercial and residential MTEs.”" - https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/06/exclusive-broadband-deals-between-isps-and-landlords-face-scrutiny-at-fcc/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/06/exclusive-broadb...
What's not illegal is landlords accepting free services from the ISPs in exchange for their tacit agreement to not allow any other ISPs in. While, of course, saying to tenants that "you can choose any provider you want".
"Go buy a condo or a house" is not an option for the vast majority of people living in apartments. Otherwise, they wouldn't be living in an apartment.
- jjeaff 7y agoIn San Francisco, if your sole reason for buying a house is to choose your ISP, it would be cheaper to launch your own wireless isp.
- IntelMiner 7y agoI worked at Comcast from 2014-2016 Comcast never explicitly signed contracts barring landlords from allowing competing services in, mainly to reduce the scope of legal culpability if it somehow came to such a thing They would offer very generous (read: free) services to the landlords of buildings however. Especially in large complexes like the one I lived in northern Seattle