Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > NEWS: US Regulator signals end of independent ISPs

Reply
Thread Tools

NEWS: US Regulator signals end of independent ISPs

 
 
Bling-Bling
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-06-2005
US Regulator signals end of independent ISPs

http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2005/08/06/fcc_dsl/


Bling Bling

--
Fink: "The Linux market is growing 30% to 35% a year."

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Mutley
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-07-2005
Bling-Bling <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>US Regulator signals end of independent ISPs
>
>http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2005/08/06/fcc_dsl/
>
>
>Bling Bling


Guess the US telcos are good Republican donors..

Telecom NZ will no doubt take heart from this as a good reason to
retain their monopoly here in NZ..
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
steve
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-08-2005
Bling-Bling wrote:

> US Regulator signals end of independent ISPs
>
> http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2005/08/06/fcc_dsl/
>
>
> Bling Bling


The story is gone now....

I know it is annoying, but often it IS better to cut / paste the whole story
so that it can still be read after the site has rolled the calendar and the
link goes dead.



 
Reply With Quote
 
Nik Coughin
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-08-2005
steve wrote:
> Bling-Bling wrote:
>
>> US Regulator signals end of independent ISPs
>>
>> http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2005/08/06/fcc_dsl/
>>
>>
>> Bling Bling

>
> The story is gone now....
>
> I know it is annoying, but often it IS better to cut / paste the
> whole story so that it can still be read after the site has rolled
> the calendar and the link goes dead.


Google cache, innit great:

FCC opens door to ISP wipe-out

US telecoms regulator the FCC has signaled the end of the independent ISP, a
move which will leave DSL provision concentrated in the hands of just a few
large providers. The move, which turns local DSL provision from a regulated
monopoly into an unregulated monopoly, also has repercussions for rural
telephony providers, who will lose a chunk of subsidy, and has potentially
chilling consequences for free speech.

Unless state regulators step into the void just vacated by the Federal
regulator, however, every independent DSL provider will find itself at the
mercy of the Baby Bells when its contract expires - and the Baby Bells have
no compulsion to renew those competitors' contracts.

At the moment in the US, DSL is sold wholesale by companies owned by the
Baby Bells, aka the "ILECs" (incumbent local exchange carriers), such as SBC
(formerly Southwestern Bell and Pacific Bell), and Verizon (formerly Bell
Atlantic). The ILECs are also DSL retailers, of course, in direct
competition with independent ISPs who depend on the ILECs for service and in
most cases, infrastructure.

In a statement today the FCC said it was scrapping the mandatory sharing
requirement on incumbents that "caused vendors to delay development and
deployment of innovations to consumers." In June the Supreme Court ruled
that cable broadband is an "information service", rather than a
"telecommunication service". The latter is subject to the watchdog's
oversight and public service obligations, while the former is not. Now the
FCC is stepping away from regulating DSL with the justification that it
needs to "level the playing field", reasoning that two mistakes cancel each
other out.

In a statement, the president of the California ISP Association CISPA Dane
Jasper described it as "a re-monopolization of a network that has been
publicly regulated and paid for by rate payers for more than 100 years."
"This is not leveling the DSL playing field. The FCC is putting a fence
around the playing field and giving the keys to a few phone companies with
armies of paid lobbyists, letting the phone companies decide who can play in
the broadband game."

So what happens next?

Much depends on what the ILECs - the wholesalers today - decide to do when
the ISP contracts expire. No ISP large or small is safe, but it's hard to
see the ILECs pulling the rug away from the larger DSL ISPs such as AOL or
Earthlink without a fight. The largest ISPs have the legal and financial
clout to make termination of their contracts at the very least awkward
experience for the Baby Bells.
The alternative for ISPs is to negotiate a deal with a CLEC, a competitive
local exchange carrier, but in practice that means Covad. (Of the three
national CLECs once offering national wholesale DSL, Covad survived Chapter
11, but Northpoint and Rhythms didn't - they went bankrupt and dissolved.)
But Covad service isn't cheap and is beyond the reach of the smaller indies.

So ILECs are likely to target the local ISPs for termination, taking out a
competitor and cutting their own costs as a bonus.
In theory the FCC's ruling shouldn't matter on a regional basis, because the
states regulate their own phone services. But in practice intensive lobbying
has neutered the state regulators.

For example, the California Public Utilities Commission decreed that SBC
should not retail DSL below the price of its wholesale offerings. However,
SBC won itself an exemption for special promotional offers, and permanently
offers retail below wholesale prices by running non-stop, back-to-back
"promotions".

Without economies of scale, and the financial muscle that buys lobbyists and
lawyers, the outlook for small DSL ISPs looks grim.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Slightly OT: Ofcom (UK telco regulator). ian field Computer Support 6 05-30-2007 09:15 PM
ADSL signals and ISPs jhewitt@arrakis.es Computer Support 6 07-27-2006 03:26 PM
OT: Intel's Offices Raided by Anti Trust Regulator's! Kevin Panzke Windows 64bit 7 07-12-2005 09:39 PM
regulator rule against local loop unbundling Chris NZ Computing 44 12-27-2003 01:29 AM
Voltage Regulator????? Ralph D. Computer Information 0 11-09-2003 05:51 AM



Advertisments