NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad
[ NNSquad ] Fwd: Susan Crawford: The Wire Next Time
Susan drops a ball forgiveably by calling the incumbents' networksprivate -- but is right on the money here regardless. The municipalnetwork solution reflects the foundations of the Communications Act --unlike the bogus notions that the FCC has cooked up rather thanactually applying the 96 Act. -- Seth "Most important, cities have assets in the form of control overconduits, poles and rights of way that can be used to support theprovision of competitive fiber-optic networks. Since 1998, myhometown, Santa Monica, Calif., has been saving money by shifting frompaying expensive leases on private communications lines to using itsown fiber network, called City Net." The Wire Next Time By SUSAN CRAWFORD APRIL 27, 2014 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/28/opinion/the-wire-next-time.html?_r=1 <SNIP> The idea of muni networks has been around for a while, with bipartisansupport. When the Telecommunications Act was under discussion in 1994,Senator Trent Lott, Republican of Mississippi, was one of its mostenthusiastic supporters. Thanks to him and others, the act, passed in1996, prohibits states from putting up unreasonable obstacles to anyentity that wants to provide telecommunications services. So why didnât a thousand muni networks bloom? After all, the 1996 actwas aimed at increasing competition. But private providers rightlyrecognized muni networks as a threat, and in the subsequent decadeshave pushed through laws in 20 states that, despite the 1996 act, makeit difficult or impossible for municipalities to clear the way for thesorts of networks that the 1996 act envisioned. <SNIP> _______________________________________________nnsquad mailing listhttp://lists.nnsquad.org/mailman/listinfo/nnsquad