<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" 
      xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0">
  <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/tom-keating/technology-and-science/broadband-monopoly.asp" />
  <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/tom-keating/atom.xml" />
  <id>tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2014:/blog/tom-keating//4/tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2005:/blog/tom-keating//4.1306-</id>
  <updated>2014-03-29T00:11:07Z</updated>
  <title>Comments for Broadband Monopoly?</title>
  <subtitle>VoIP &amp; Gadgets blog - Latest news in VoIP &amp; gadgets, wireless, mobile phones, reviews, &amp; opinions</subtitle>
  <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type 4.38</generator>
  <entry>
    <id>tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2005:/blog/tom-keating//4.1306</id>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/tom-keating/technology-and-science/broadband-monopoly.asp" />
    <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/mt/mt-atom.cgi/weblog/blog_id=4/entry_id=1306" title="Broadband Monopoly?" />
    <published>2005-01-28T16:15:49Z</published>
    <updated>2008-04-10T21:35:28Z</updated>
    <title>Broadband Monopoly?</title>
    <summary>IPInferno brought an interesting news item to my attention. Sonic.net is claiming that deregulating broadband will kill independent ISPs and result in less competition. Obviously, with less broadband competition this could have quite a bearing on VoIP broadband service. Check...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>Tom Keating</name>
      <uri>http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/tom-keating/</uri>
    </author>
    
    <category term="Technology and Science" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/tom-keating/">
      <![CDATA[<p><a href="http://ipinferno.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">IPInferno</a> brought an interesting news item to my attention.  Sonic.net is claiming that deregulating broadband will kill independent ISPs and result in less competition. Obviously, with less broadband competition this could have quite a bearing on VoIP broadband service.</p>

<p>Check out IPInferno's site and also read this from <a href="http://www.sonic.net/whatsnew/fcc/">Sonic.net</a></p>

<p><b>Bellsouth seeks DSL Monopoly</b><br />
Sonic.net on Monday December 20th filed comments (PDF) at the FCC in response to BellSouth's request to exclude independent ISPs from access to DSL. Sonic.net is very concerned that if BellSouth is allowed to re-monopolize the telecommunications market, and if SBC follows this precident, virtually all consumers in California will be left with just two choices for broadband: SBC/Yahoo or Comcast. While we don't anticipate that this would directly affect Sonic.net customers in the next few years, it could signifigantly impact the ongoing viability of independent Internet Service Providers. The California ISP Association also filed comments, as has the Federation of Internet Service Providers.</p>

<p>BellSouth's assertion is that because they already control over 90% of the broadband DSL access in their market area, this change will have little effect on the competetive landscape, and that this change will not harm consumers. If you feel that being forced to purchase broadband DSL only from the telephone company's own ISP would harm you as a consumer and would limit your choices, you can also file comments with the FCC. We will shortly be publishing more information about BellSouth's petition, and what you can do to help fight it.</p>

<p>Related Documents<br />
BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. Petition for Forbearance (PDF) <br />
FCC invitation for comment regarding FCC Docket no. 04-405 (PDF) <br />
FCC listing of all comments received regarding FCC Docket No. 04-405 (link) <br />
CISPA comment on FCC Docket No. 04-405 (PDF) <br />
Sonic.net comment on FCC Docket No. 04-405 (PDF) <br />
File your comments<br />
You may provide brief comments via a web form, or write a longer comment if you wish as a document which you can upload. Be sure to reference Proceeding 04-405 in the first box. <a href="http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi ">http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi </a><br />
</p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2005:/blog/tom-keating//4.1306-comment:1562</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2005:/blog/tom-keating//4.1306" type="text/html" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/tom-keating/technology-and-science/broadband-monopoly.asp"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/tom-keating/technology-and-science/broadband-monopoly.asp#c1562" />
    <title>Comment from Al Bredenberg on 2005-01-28</title>
    <author>
        <name>Al Bredenberg</name>
        <uri>http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/bredenberg-voip-crm/voip-crm/bellsouth-obstructing-fttp-in-louisiana.asp</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/bredenberg-voip-crm/voip-crm/bellsouth-obstructing-fttp-in-louisiana.asp">
        <![CDATA[<p>This reminds me of accusations that BellSouth is trying to prevent a town in Louisiana from developing its own FTTP program. I wrote something about it previously on my blog (see my link posted with this comment): "BellSouth Obstructing FTTP in Louisiana?"</p>

<p>Al B.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2005-01-28T17:08:09Z</published>
  </entry>

</feed>
