[LUNI] OT - Fiber internet

[Kenneth P. Stox]

On Tue, 2006-11-07 at 14:25 -0600, Kevin Hill wrote:
> The problem as I understand it is that AT&T wants to offer cable 
> television services over IP, after Comcast, et al. paid large franchise 
> fees to local governments for exclusive rights to provide cable 
> television service. Looks like its going to court in a lot of towns 
> around here.

There are several elements to the suits. One, as you mention, is the
issue of franchise fees. Others include:

1) Municipal stations, and public access channel facilities.

2) Use of telephone right of ways for information services. 

3) Aesthetic issues regarding the location, placement, appearance of
remote facilities. ( One of my neighbors has an RT by their front yard.
It is an ugly beige box 12'x6'x4', needless to say, they are not happy.)

4) Community coverage. AT&T does not want to commit to covering every
house in a community like they do with the phone system, and like cable
providers are bound to do.

5) Local franchise agreements. AT&T does not wish to negotiate on a
community by community basis. They are trying to get their agenda pushed
forward with State and possibly Federal agreements.

AT&T has been gaming the system. They are a Telco, an Information
Service provider, or Cable-TV provider, when it is convenient. Whatever
label gives them the most favorable legal position at the moment. One
thing has never changed at AT&T, all these years, a large and highly
skilled legal department. Oh yeah, and large campaign contributions
along with a throng of lobbyists doesn't hurt either.

I hope all you folks voted today.